green
Positive treatment
4.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co.
See North Carolina Utilities Commission v. FCC, 552 F.2d 1036 , 1040 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Albert Ralph Velasquez v. Southern Pacific Transportation Company
See Southern Pacific Transportation Company v. Usery, 539 F.2d 386 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 221 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977); see also Consolidated Rail Corporation, 10 OSHC (BNA) 1577 (1982) (OSHA regulations not applicable to floor openings in engine repair shop because of displacement by FRA policy statement). 1 Velasquez points to the FRA’s definition of railroad operations as the “movement of equipment over rails,” 43 Fed.Reg. at 10585, and argues that this language limits displacement of OSHA to activities actually involving such movement.
cited
Cited "see"
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
See North Carolina Utilities Comm. v. FCC, 552 F.2d 1036 , 1055 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
The Western Union Telegraph Company v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Itt World Communications, Inc., Western Union International, Inc., Rca Global Communications, Inc., Trans-Lux Corporation, Intervenors (2 Cases). The Western Union Telegraph Company v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Graphnet, Inc., Trans-Lux Corporation, Rca Global Communications, Inc., Intervenors. The Western Union Telegraph Company v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Trans-Lux Corporation, Rca Global Communications, Inc., Intervenors. Trt Telecommunications Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Rca Global Communications, Inc., Western Union Telegraph Company, Western Union International, Inc., Itt World Communications, Inc., Intervenors. Trt Telecommunications Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Rca Global Communications, Inc., Trans-Lux Corporation, Intervenors
See North Carolina Utilities Comm. v. FCC, 552 F.2d 1036 , 1055 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Callahan v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.
See, e.g., Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Usery, 539 F.2d 386 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 221 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977); see also Assoc. of Amer.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Michael Ray Shifflett, United States of America v. Ernest Elwood Shifflett, United States of America v. Wendy Shifflett McAllister United States of America v. William Dale Ralston, United States of America v. Donald Millard Shifflett, Claimant-Appellant, and Michael Ray Shifflett, United States of America v. Michael Ray Shifflett, United States of America v. Michael Ray Shifflett
See, e.g., North Carolina Utilities Comm'n v. F.C.C., 552 F.2d 1036 , 1044 n. 8 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
City of Norwich v. Occup. Safety, No. Cv 93 053 14 50 (Oct. 25, 1994)
See also Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Usery , 539 F.2d 386 (5th Cir. 1976, cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 (1977), cited by the defendant state commissioner of labor.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Walter Lee Chambers, United States of America v. James Isaac Johnson
(2×)
Compare North Carolina Utilities Comm’n v. Federal Communications Com., 552 F.2d 1036 , 1044 n. 8 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977) (holding that only an en banc court, not a subsequent panel, has authority to overturn a previous panel’s published decision), with Hales v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 500 F.2d 836, 849 (4th Cir.1974) (holding that a subsequent panel is not bound by a previous panel’s decision where that decision does not specifically address the question at hand).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Crockett Telephone Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
See also North Carolina Utilities Commission v. FCC, 552 F.2d 1036 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 223, 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Crockett Telephone Company v. Federal Communications Commission
See also North Carolina Utilities Commission v. FCC, 552 F.2d 1036 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 223, 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Anthony Thomas Torcasio
Even were we so inclined, that course of action “lies beyond our province as a panel of this court....” Caldwell v. Ogden Sea Transport, Inc., 618 F.2d 1037, 1041 (4th Cir.1980); see also North Carolina Utilities Commission v. Federal Communications Commission, 552 F.2d 1036, 1044, n. 8 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission
See, e. g., North Carolina Utilities Comm’n v. FCC, 537 F. 2d 787 (CA4), cert. denied, 429 U. S. 1027 (1976), and North Carolina Utilities Comm’n v. FCC, 552 F. 2d 1036 (CA4), cert. denied, 434 U. S. 874 (1977) (Where FCC acted within its authority to permit subscribers to provide their own telephones, pre-emption of inconsistent state regulation prohibiting subscribers from connecting their own phones unless used ex- elusively in interstate service upheld since state regulation would negate the federal tariff).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. FCC
See, e. g., North Carolina Utilities Comm'n v. FCC, 537 F. 2d 787 (CA4), cert. denied, 429 U. S. 1027 (1976), and North Carolina Utilities Comm'n v. FCC, 552 F. 2d 1036 (CA4), cert. denied, 434 U. S. 874 (1977) (Where FCC acted within its authority to permit subscribers to provide their own telephones, pre-emption of inconsistent state regulation prohibiting subscribers from connecting their own phones unless used exclusively in interstate service upheld since state regulation would negate the federal tariff). [5] Respondents maintain that since "[s]pecific terms prevail over the general," Fou…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Marshall v. Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc.
See, e. g., Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Usery, 539 F.2d 386 (5th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977); Southern Ry. v. OSHRC, 539 F.2d 335 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 999 , 97 S.Ct. 525 , 50 L.Ed.2d 609 (1976); Baltimore & Ohio R.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
6 O.S.H. Cas.(bna) 1481, 1978 O.S.H.D. (Cch) P 22,671 Ray Marshall, Secretary of Labor, U. S. Department of Labor, Plaintiff v. Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc.
See, e. g., Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Usery, 539 F.2d 386 (5th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 874 , 98 S.Ct. 222 , 54 L.Ed.2d 154 (1977); Southern Ry. v. OSHRC, 539 F.2d 335 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 999 , 97 S.Ct. 525 , 50 L.Ed.2d 609 (1976); Baltimore & Ohio R.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mitchell, Warden
v.
Healey
v.
Healey
No. 77-226.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 3, 1977.
Cited by 3 opinions | Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.