green
Positive treatment
9.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
E. J. Delaney Corporation, and Ski Kit, Inc.,plaintiffs-Appellees v. Bonne Bell, Inc. And Jess Bell
As to the Ninth Circuit, the court took a contrary view in Lessig v. Tidewater Oil Company, 327 F.2d 459 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. denied 377 U.S. 993 , 84 S.Ct. 1920 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1046 (1964); but see also Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Company, 489 F.2d 8 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974); and Bushie v. Stenocord Corporation, 460 F.2d 116 (9th Cir. 1972).
cited
Cited "see"
Mishkin Ex Rel. Liquidation of the Business of Adler, Coleman Clearing Corp. v. Gurian
See International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1350 (2d Cir.1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974). 3.
discussed
Cited "see"
Cobell v. Norton
See Int’l Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1356 (2d Cir.1974), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); United States v. Bedford Assocs., 618 F.2d 904 (2d Cir.1980); Corrigan Dispatch Co. v. Casa Guzman, S.A., 569 F.2d 300, 302-03 (5th Cir. 1978); Cont'l Oil Co. v. Frontier Refining Co., 338 F.2d 780, 782 (10th Cir.1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Dean
Although there are other debtors who have benefited from the decision in Prudential Mortgage & Investment Co. v. New Britain, supra, 123 Conn. 393 , the respondent is a judge and “[m]ore is expected of him and, since he is a judge, rightfully so.” In re Troy, 364 Mass. 15, 71 , 306 N.E.2d 203 (1973); see Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, 10 Cal. 3d 270, 281 , 515 P.2d 1 , 110 Cal. Rptr. 201 (1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S. Ct. 2643 , 41 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Stanley v. Darlington County School District
See Akron Bd. of Educ. v. State Bd. of Educ., 490 F.2d 1285, 1289 (6th Cir.) (parents’ concern unlikely to be aroused because of the small size of area to be transferred from district and minimal present impact), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); Bradley v. School Bd., 338 F.Supp. 67, 230 (E.D.Va.) (“were school boards not to be accorded standing, serious deprivations to constitutional rights might occur, especially in situations wherein individual plaintiffs might well lack the resources to bring and maintain the type of mammoth law suit involved”), rev…
discussed
Cited "see"
Maryland Department of Human Resources Ruth W. Massinga, Secretary Linda Walter, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. United States Department of Agriculture John R. Block, Secretary, Maryland Department of Human Resources Ruth W. Massinga, Secretary Melinda Y. Harps, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. United States Department of Agriculture John R. Block, Secretary
See id. at 42-43 23 The virtual certainty that USDA would suffer substantial monetary damage from an injunction forcing it to dispense funds in accordance with Maryland's disputed exclusions distinguishes this case from those recognizing a district court's discretion to set a bond amount of zero where the enjoined or restrained party faces no likelihood of material harm, see, e.g., International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1356 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); Scherr v. Volpe, 466 F.2d 1027, 1035 (7th Cir.1972); Continental Oil Co. v. F…
discussed
Cited "see"
Housing Authority of the Kaw Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma v. City of Ponca City, a Municipal Corporation
See Akron Bd. of Educ. v. State Bd. of Educ., 490 F.2d 1285, 1298 (6th Cir.1974) (Weick, J., dissenting), cert. de *1190 nied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); accord City of South Lake Tahoe v. California Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 625 F.2d 231, 233 (9th Cir.1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Scadron v. City of Des Plaines
See Art Neon Co. v. City and County of Denver, 488 F.2d 118, 123 (10th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); City of Lake Wales v. Lamar Advertising Association, 414 So.2d 1030, 1032 (Fla. 1982); R.O.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Inquiry Concerning Baker
See Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, 10 Cal.3d 270 , 515 P.2d 1 , 110 Cal. Rptr. 201 (1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974).
cited
Cited "see"
Cotter v. Helmer
See International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1356 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Terry A. ROCHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellee
(2×)
See Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 14 (9th Cir.1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed. 2d 235 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Peone v. Regulus Stud Mills, Inc.
(2×)
See King v. Shelby Rural Electric Co-op Corp., 502 S.W.2d 659 (Ky.1973) cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1973); Tauscher v. Puget Sound Power & Light Company, 96 Wash.2d 274 , 635 P.2d 426 (1981); Johns v. New York Blower Company, 442 N.E.2d 382 (Ind.App.1982); Vertentes v. Barletta Co., Inc., 392 Mass. 165 , 466 N.E.2d 500 (1984); Sierra Pacific Power Company v. Rinehart, 99 Nev. 557 , 665 P.2d 270 (1983); and Conover v. Northern States Power Company, 313 N.W.2d 397 (Minn.1981).
cited
Cited "see"
City of Houston v. Harris County Outdoor Advertising Ass'n
See Art Neon, Inc. v. City and County of Denver, 488 F.2d 118 (10th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); E.B.
discussed
Cited "see"
Matter of Oliver
(2×)
See Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, 10 Cal.3d 270 , 515 P.2d 1 , 110 Cal.Rptr. 201 (1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Apex Oil Company v. Vanguard Oil & Service Co. Inc.
(2×)
Id. at 942; see International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1341 n. 6 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Feit & Drexler, Inc.
Yet, even where the ultimate relief sought is money damages, federal courts have found preliminary injunctions appropriate where it has been shown that the defendant "intended to frustrate any judgment on the merits" by "transfer[ring its assets] out of the jurisdiction." Productos Carnic, S.A. v. Central American Beef & Seafood Trading Co., 621 F.2d 683, 686 (5th Cir.1980); see International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1347 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); United States v. Ross.
discussed
Cited "see"
Green v. Drexler
Yet, even where the ultimate relief sought is money damages, federal courts have found preliminary injunctions appropriate where it has been shown that the defendant “intended to frustrate any judgment on the merits” by “transfer[ring its assets] out of the jurisdiction.” Productos Carnic, S.A. v. Central American Beef & Seafood Trading Co., 621 F.2d 683 , 686 (5th Cir.1980); see International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1347 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); United States v. Ross.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Kneifl
See Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, 10 Cal.3d 270 , 515 P.2d 1 , 110 Cal.Rptr. 201 (1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974).
cited
Cited "see"
State ex rel. Commission on Judicial Qualifications v. Kneifl
See Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, 10 Cal. 3d 270 , 515 P.2d 1 , 110 Cal. Rptr. 201 (1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S. Ct. 2643 , 41 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,706 Pittsburgh Terminal Corporation v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, W. James Price, Alonzo G. Decker, Jr., James Parker Nolan, Frederick Deane, Jr., James L. O'keefe, Gregory S. Devine, Fay A. Le Favre, Nicholas T. Camicia, Dr. Milton S. Eisenhower, Steven Muller, John K. Stevenson, Hays T. Watkins, Howard E. Simpson and Cyrus S. Eaton, All Directors or Former Directors of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad And/or the Chessie System, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company and Chessie System, Inc. Monroe Guttmann, Loretta Guttmann, Janet Rees and Evelyn Bittner v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, W. James Price, Alonzo G. Decker, Jr., James Parker Nolan, Frederick Deane, Jr., James L. O'keefe, Gregory S. Devine, Fay A. Le Fevre, Nicholas T. Camicia, Dr. Milton S. Eisenhower, Steven Muller, John K. Stevenson, Hays T. Watkins, Howard E. Simpson and Cyrus S. Eaton, All Directors or Former Directors of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad And/or the Chessie System, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company and Chessie System, Inc
See International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1345 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974) (a dividend in kind of shares of a spun off corporation qualifies as a sale of securities).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pittsburgh Terminal Corp. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
See International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1345 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974) (a dividend in kind of shares of a spun off corporation qualifies as a sale of securities).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,226 Elliot Handler v. Securities and Exchange Commission
See International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974) (special counsel); SEC v. United Financial Group, Inc., 474 F.2d 354, 358 (9th Cir. 1973) (receiver); SEC v. Koenig, 469 F.2d 198 (2d Cir. 1972) (receiver); SEC v. Manor Nursing Centers, Inc., 458 F.2d 1082 (2d Cir. 1972) (trustee).
cited
Cited "see"
Eli Trujillo v. Uniroyal Corporation, a New Jersey Corporation
See Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 14 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kirshner v. United States
To be sure, in Birnbaum v. Newport Steel Corp., 193 F.2d 461 (2d Cir.), Cert. denied, 343 U.S. 956 , 72 S.Ct. 1051 , 96 L.Ed. 1356 (1952), affirming dismissal of a derivative action against a director for violation of § 10(b) where the director had sold his shares in the corporation to an outside purchaser, we stated that § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 "extended protection only to the defrauded purchaser or seller," Id. at 464. 27 Since its promulgation in 1952, the Birnbaum rule has been adhered to consistently in this circuit; see International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1346 n. 16 (…
discussed
Cited "see"
Kirshner v. United States
Since its promulgation in 1952, the Birnbaum rule has been adhered to consistently in this circuit; see International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1346 n. 16 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Regents of the University of Minnesota v. The National Collegiate Athletic Association
(2×)
See Akron Bd. of Educ. v. State Board of Educ., 490 F.2d 1285 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974) (all three opinions).
cited
Cited "see"
Marder v. Conwed Corp.
See Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Brager & Co., Inc. v. Leumi Securities Corp.
See Hallmark *1348 Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 12-13 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974); Jack Winter, Inc. v. Koratron Co., 375 F.Supp. 1, 70 (N.D.Cal.1974).
cited
Cited "see"
Harris v. Mayor of Baltimore
See Art Neon Co. v. City and County of Denver, 488 F. 2d 118 (10th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U. S. 932 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Clarkson Co., Ltd. v. Shaheen
See Sonesta Int'l Hotels Corp. v. Wellington Associates, 483 F.2d 247, 250 (2d Cir. 1973). 19 Because no request for a bond was ever made in the district court, and because, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 65, the amount of any bond to be given upon the issuance of a preliminary injunction rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1356 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974), the district court may dispense with the filing of a bond.
discussed
Cited "see"
George Dickstein v. Seventy Corporation and Peter Boyko, George Dickstein v. Grantham, Inc.
See General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 489 F.2d 1105, 1116 (6th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974) (prior judicial proceedings); American Home Products Corp. v. Lockwood Mfg.
cited
Cited "see"
Knutson v. Daily Review, Inc.
See Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 11-13 (9th Cir. 1973), petition for cert. filed, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974); Moore v. Jas.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Village of Valatie v. Smith
"Amortization period” simply designates a period of time granted to owners of nonconforming uses during which they may phase out their operations as they see fit and make other arrangements (id.; see also, Art Neon Co. v City & County of Denver, 488 F2d 118, 121 [5th Cir], cert denied 417 US 932 ).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Benten Ex Rel. Tyrer v. Kessler
Clarkson Co. v. Shaheen, 544 F.2d 624, 632 (2d Cir.1976); see also International Controls v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1356 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
National Advertising Company v. City of Raleigh, North Carolina, Southern Environmental Law Center, Amicus Curiae
See, e.g., Art Neon Co. v. City and County of Denver, 488 F.2d 118, 122 (10th Cir.1973) (upholding five-year amortization period for outdoor signs as reasonable prior to period's expiration), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); see also Summey Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. The County of Henderson, 96 N.C.App. 533 , 386 S.E.2d 439, 446 (1989) (same), pet. for disc. rev. denied, 326 N.C. 486 , 392 S.E.2d 101 (1990); R.O.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Plock v. Crossroads Joint Venture
See, also, King v. Shelby Rural Electric Cooperative Corp., 502 S.W.2d 659 (Ky. 1973), cert. denied 417 U.S. 932, 94 S. Ct. *222 2644, 41 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
City of Fort Collins v. Root Outdoor Advertising, Inc.
See, e.g., Art Neon Co. v. City & County of Denver, 488 F.2d 118 (10th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Republic of Philippines v. Marcos
However, preliminary injunctions are proper to prevent a defendant from making a judgment uncollectible, In re Feit & Drexler, Inc., 760 F.2d 406, 416 (2d Cir.1985); see also International Controls v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1347 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974), and "[a] preliminary injunction is always appropriate to grant intermediate relief of the same character as that which may be granted finally." De Beers Consolidated Mines, 325 U.S. at 220 , 65 S.Ct. at 1134 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos
However, preliminary injunctions are proper to prevent a defendant from making a judgment uncollectible, In re Feit & Drexler, Inc., 760 F.2d 406, 416 (2d Cir.1985); see also International Controls v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1347 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974), and “[a] preliminary injunction is always appropriate to grant intermediate relief of the same character as that which may be granted finally.” De Beers Consolidated Mines, 325 U.S. at 220 , 65 S.Ct. at 1134 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Grayson v. Grayson
For that very reason every effort should be made to render it as adequate as it humanly can be.” Id., 942-43 ; see also International Controls Corporation v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1341 n.6 (2d Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S. Ct. 2644 , 41 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Brinkman v. Gilligan
See also Akron Board of Education v. State Board of Education, 490 F.2d 1285, 1292 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974) (dictum).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Board of School Directors of Milwaukee v. Wisconsin
See, e.g., Akron Board of Education v. State Board of Education, 490 F.2d 1285, 1290 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company, a Corporation of Delaware v. Eco Chem, Inc., a Corporation of Minnesota, George G. Rynne, an Individual
(2×)
The court flatly rejected this argument: “[I]f the corporation is Havey’s alter ego, its contacts are his and due process is satisfied.” Id. at 637 ; see also, International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334, 1350 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974) (by using its equitable power to pierce the corporate veil the court had jurisdiction over a corporation by virtue of the activities of its dominant shareholder).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Formal Inquiry Concerning Judge Bennett
See, e.g., Geiler v. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, 10 Cal.3d 270, 275 , 110 Cal.Rptr. 201 , 515 P.2d 1 (1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974); In Re Hanson, 532 P.2d 303, 308 (Alaska 1975); In Re Crowell, 379 So.2d 107, 109 (Fla.1979); In Re Rome, 218 Kan. 198, 206 , 542 P.2d 676 (1975); Matter of Cieminski, 270 N.W.2d 321, 326 (N.D.1978); In Re Jordan, 290 Ore. 303, 307 , 622 P.2d 297 (1981); Matter of Heuermann, 90 S.D. 312, 317 , 240 N.W.2d 603 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Philip Alan Froude, Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, American Motorists Insurance Company
Fed.R.Civ.P. 61; see, e.g., Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 14 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974). 20 Although in our view the medical testimony and the plain meaning of the policy language strongly support the manifestation approach, any remaining doubts about interpretation of the policies are properly resolved in favor of the insured, in order to effectuate the policies' purpose of providing coverage.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
Fed.R.Civ.P. 61; see, e.g., Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 14 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bryant v. Colvin
However, pretermitting the issue of whether the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, in its strict sense, is applicable, the primary question for determination is whether the evidence introduced, with all reasonable deductions therefrom demanded a verdict for the defendant as the standards for granting a motion for judgment n.o.v. are the same as those governing direction of a verdict. 5A Moore’s Federal Practice 50-76, Chap. 50.07 [2]; see also Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F2d 8 (9th Cir. 1974), cert. den. 417 U. S. 932 ; Fireman’s Fund Ins.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sidewinder Marine, Inc. v. Starbuck Kustom Boats and Products, Inc.
See, e. g., General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 489 F.2d 1105, 1116 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 . 7 *207 Still, such a prior adjudication of validity “does not, absent estoppel running against the parties to the prior litigations, supplant the primary duty of a court to dispose of cases according to the law and the facts of the particular case before it,” Safe Flight Instrument Corp. v. McDonnell-Douglas Corp., supra, 482 F.2d at 1090 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Klamberg v. Roth
See, e. g., International Controls Corp. v. Vesco, 490 F.2d 1334 , 1345-46 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2644 , 41 L.Ed.2d 236 (1974); Ruckle v. Roto Am.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lee v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.
See also Hallmark Industry v. Reynolds Metals Co., 489 F.2d 8, 13 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 932 , 94 S.Ct. 2643 , 41 L.Ed.2d 235 , rehearing denied, 419 U.S. 1028 , 95 S.Ct. 509 , 42 L.Ed.2d 304 (1974); Hannigan v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 410 F.2d 285, 287 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 902 , 90 S.Ct. 214 , 24 L.Ed.2d 178 (1969); O’Neil v. W.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State Board of Education of Ohio
v.
Akron Board of Education
v.
Akron Board of Education
No. 73-1545.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 3, 1974.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.