green
Positive treatment
6.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "see"
Tavoulareas v. Piro
(3×)
See McSurely v. McClellan, 521 F.2d 1024 (D.C.Cir.1975), aff’d by an equally divided court, 553 F.2d 1277 (D.C.Cir.1976) (en banc), cert. dismissed, 438 U.S. 189 , 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978).
examined
Cited "see"
Forsyth v. Kleindienst
(3×)
See McSurely v. McClellan, 172 U.S.App.D.C. 364 , 521 F.2d 1024 (1975), en banc, 180 U.S.App.D.C. 101 , 553 F.2d 1277 (1976), cert. dismissed, 438 U.S. 189 , 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978).
examined
Cited "see"
Keith Forsyth v. Richard G. Kleindienst, Individually and as Attorney General of the United States, L. Patrick Gray, 3rd, Individually and as Acting Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, John N. Mitchell, Individually and as Former Attorney General of the United States, John Doe and Richard Roe, Albert Cooper and David Porter. Appeal of John N. Mitchell, E. Davis Porter, and Albert Cooper. Katherine W. Burkhart, Judith Chomsky, Eva Gold, Dina Portnoy, Candy Putter, Joshua (Josh) Markel v. William Saxbe, Individually and as Attorney General of the United States, Clarence Kelley, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, John N. Mitchell, Individually and as Former Attorney General of the United States, John Doe, and Richard Roe, Appeal of John N. Mitchell, Clarence Kelley, and William Saxbe
(6×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See McSurely v. McClellan, 172 U.S.App.D.C. 364 , 521 F.2d 1024 (1975), En banc, 180 U.S.App.D.C. 101 , 553 F.2d 1277 (1976), Cert. dismissed, 438 U.S. 189 , 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978). 14 Finally, we reject the defendants' suggestion that we take this opportunity to review the district courts' denials of their motions for summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity.
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Lunderstadt v. Colafella
(3×)
In short, the Court held that "[w]e are unable to discern any 'conscious choice' to grant immunity for defamatory statements scattered far and wide by mail, press, and the electronic media." Id. at 132, 99 S.Ct. at 2686; see also McSurely v. McClellan, 553 F.2d 1277, 1285-86 (D.C.Cir.1976) (in banc) (dissemination of material to individuals or other government agencies outside of Congress is not protected activity), cert. granted, 434 U.S. 888 , 98 S.Ct. 260 , 54 L.Ed.2d 173 (1977), cert. dismissed, 438 U.S. 189 , 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978). 44 Appellants rely on this language in ar…
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Lunderstadt v. Colafella
(3×)
In short, the Court held that “[w]e are unable to discern any ‘conscious choice’ to grant immunity for defamatory statements scattered far and wide by mail, press, and the electronic media.” Id. at 132, 99 S.Ct. at 2686; see also McSurely v. McClellan, 553 F.2d 1277, 1285-86 (D.C.Cir.1976) (in banc) (dissemination of material to individuals or other government agencies outside of Congress is not protected activity), cert. granted, 434 U.S. 888 , 98 S.Ct. 260 , 54 L.Ed.2d 173 (1977), cert. dismissed, 438 U.S. 189 , 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mario Biaggi and Meade Esposito
(3×)
See also McSurely v. McClellan, 553 F.2d 1277, 1286 (D.C.Cir.1975) (en banc) (“information gathering, whether by issuance of subpoenas or field work by a Senator or his staff, is essential to informed deliberation over proposed legislation” and hence is protected legislative activity), cert. dismissed, 438 U.S. 189 , 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Candis O. Ray, Trading as Candis O. Ray & Associates v. Senator William Proxmire
(2×)
Compare Gravel v. United States, supra note 5, 408 U.S. at 625-626 , 92 S.Ct. at 2627-2628 , 33 L.Ed.2d at 602 -603 and McSurely v. McClellan, 180 U.S.App.D.C. 101, 109 , 553 F.2d 1277, 1285 (1976), cert. dismissed,-U.S.-, 98 S.Ct. 3116 , 57 L.Ed.2d 704 (1978); see Doe v. McMillan, 185 U.S.App.D.C. 48 , 566 F.2d 713 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 969 , 98 S.Ct. 1607 , 56 L.Ed.2d 59 (1978), after remand from 412 U.S. 306 , 93 S.Ct. 2018 , 36 L.Ed.2d 912 (1973); Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 579 F.2d 1027 (7th Cir. 1978). 8 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
McADAMS, EXECUTOR, ET AL.
v.
McSURELY ET UX.
v.
McSURELY ET UX.
76-1621.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 26, 1978.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 25 opinions | Published
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT.
Deputy Solicitor General Easterbrook argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Acting Solicitor General Friedman and Assistant Attorney General Babcock.
Morton Stavis argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Doris Peterson, Nancy Stearns, Dan Jack Combs, and Charles N. Mason, Jr.
PER CURIAM.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.