green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
8.1 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“What Schofield I did require, however, was a minimum showing by affidavit in every case ... ”
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re: Grand Jury
what schofield i did require, however, was a minimum showing by affidavit in every case. . .
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Grand Jury and in the Matter of the Search of Jelanie Solomon
what schofield i did require, however, was a minimum showing by affidavit in every case ...
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Grand Jury Matter. In Re Linda Backiel, Witness
schofield ii
cited
Cited "see"
Baylson v. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Accord In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield II), 507 F.2d 963, 966 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Texaco, Inc. v. Department of Energy
See City of Long Beach v. DOE, 754 F.2d 379 (TECA 1985), holding that Section 18 empowers the Department to grant exception relief after decontrol and distinguishing United States v. California, 504 F.2d 750 (TECA 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2423 , 44 L.Ed.2d 684 (1975). .
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Matter. Appeal of District Council 33 Health and Welfare Fund, District Council 33 Legal Fund and Earl Stout
See In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield I), 486 F.2d 85, 93 (3d Cir.1973) and In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield II), 507 F.2d 963, 965 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Served Upon John Doe, Esq., Richard Roe, Intervenor-Appellant v. United States
(2×)
See In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield), 507 F.2d 963, 966 (3 Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Grand Jury Proceedings of Freeman
See In re Grand Jury Proceedings (United States v. Bank of Nova Scotia), 691 F.2d 1384, 1387-88 (11th Cir.1982) (turning aside a similar argument based on the Third Circuit’s holdings in In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 486 F.2d 85 (3rd Cir.1973) (Schofield I), and 507 F.2d 963 (3rd Cir.) (Schofield II) , cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975)); In re Grand Jury Investigation (United States v. McLean), 565 F.2d 318, 320 (5th Cir.1977) (same).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Proceedings in the Matter of Yale Freeman, Bruce Randall, Barry Halpern, Witnesses, and Michael Wisotsky and Myron Wisotsky, Intervenors-Appellants. In Re Grand Jury Proceedings in the Matter of Yale Freeman, Barry Halpern, Witnesses, Bruce Randall, Witness-Appellant, Michael Wisotsky and Myron Wisotsky, Intervenors
See In re Grand Jury Proceedings (United States v. Bank of Nova Scotia), 691 F.2d 1384, 1387-88 (11th Cir.1982) (turning aside a similar argument based on the Third Circuit's holdings in In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 486 F.2d 85 (3rd Cir.1973) (Schofield I ), and 507 F.2d 963 (3rd Cir.) (Schofield II ), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975)); In re Grand Jury Investigation (United States v. McLean), 565 F.2d 318, 320 (5th Cir.1977) (same). 12 We note that the panel decision in Harvey, which relied on Schofield I and II, has no present vitality even in the Fourth C…
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena to Seiffert
See In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 507 F.2d 963 (3d Cir. 1975), cert. den. 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975); see also Matter of Grand Jury Impaneled Jan. 21, 1975, 529 F.2d 543 (3d Cir. 1976), cert. den. 425 U.S. 992 , 96 S.Ct. 2203 , 48 L.Ed.2d 816 (1976); In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 486 F.2d 85 (3d Cir. 1973) (Schofield I); United States v. Weiner, 418 F.Supp. 941 (M.D.Pa.1976), aff’d. 546 F.2d 420 , 421 (3d Cir. 1976), cert. den. 429 U.S. 1105 , 97 S.Ct. 1135 , 51 L.Ed.2d 557 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Moore
See, In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 507 F.2d 963 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Investigation. Appeal of Alexander Hartzell, a Witness
(2×)
See In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield II), 507 F.2d 963, 966-67 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975); In re Grand Jury Impaneled January 21, 1975, supra, 529 F.2d at 548 .
cited
Cited "see"
Pasco, Inc. v. Federal Energy Administration
See United States v. State of California, 504 F.2d 750 (Em.App.1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2423 , 44 L.Ed.2d 684 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. State of NY
FSLIC v. Director of Revenue, 650 F.Supp. 1217 (N.D.Ill.1986); see also Brennan v. Iowa, 494 F.2d 100 (8th Cir.1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2422 , 44 L.Ed.2d 683 (1975) (Secretary of Labor’s exercise of express statutory authority to enforce FLSA is suit by United States). 19 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Accetturo
See also In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield II), 507 F.2d 963, 970 (3d Cir.) (Aldisert, J., dissenting) (supervisory power can be used to insure proper procedural safeguards as "a legitimate function of a court's law-making role"), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Accetturo
See also In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Schofield II), 507 F.2d 963, 970 (3d Cir.) (Aldisert, J., dissenting) (supervisory power can be used to insure proper procedural safeguards as “a legitimate function of a court’s law-making role”), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed.2d 685 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Intervenor. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
See also A.App. at 6a 22 A.App. 15a 23 Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. v. Department of the Treasury, Civ.No. 74-1389 (D.D.C.1974) 24 See Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, § 218, reprinted as amended following 12 U.S.C. § 1904 (1976) 25 Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, § 211(b), reprinted as amended following 12 U.S.C. § 1904 (1976) 26 United States v. State of California, 504 F.2d 750 (Temp.Emer.Ct.App.1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2423 , 44 L.Ed.2d 864 (1975) 27 State of California dealt with a California law, effective on July 1, 1973, providing salary increase…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In RE GRAND JURY SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM v. State
Co. v. United States, 508 F. 2d 684 , 686, n. 2 (8 Cir.1975); compare In re Grand Jury Proceedings, *473 507 F. 2d 963 (3 Cir.1975), cert. den. 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2424 , 44 L.Ed. 2d 685 (1975); In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 486 F. 2d 85, 93 (3 Cir.1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
John T. Dunlop, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. The State of New Jersey
Compare Brennan v. Iowa, 494 F.2d 100, 104-105 (8th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 421 U. S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2422 , 44 L.Ed.2d 683 (1975) (No. 73-1565) holding that a restitution order against the State of Iowa was appropriate where the parties had previously stipulated to such an award in the event that the Secretary of Labor prevailed.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Critzer
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 74-1163.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania.
Jun 9, 1975.
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Douglas would grant certiorari.