green
Positive treatment
3.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "but see"
Richard Spika v. The Village of Lombard, Illinois
But see Mizell v. Attorney General, 586 F.2d 942 , 944-45 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978) (treating the issue as waived by the parties), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979).
cited
Cited "but see"
R.E. Rodgers and Barbara Rodgers v. James G. Watt, Secretary of the Interior of the United States of America
But see Mizell v. Attorney General of State of N.Y., 586 F.2d 942 , 944-45 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re PT-1 Communications, Inc.
See Mizell v. Attorney General of N.Y., 586 F.2d 942 , 945 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978), cert, denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979) (“Although this circuit has not squarely addressed the issue [of whether a court may vacate and re-enter a judgment under Rule 60(b) to allow a timely appeal], prior decisions indicate that a Rule 60(b)(6) motion may not be granted absent some showing of diligent effort by counsel to ascertain the status of the case.” (internal citation omitted)); Witty v. Dukakis, 3 F.3d 517, 520 (1st Cir.1993) (“[Pjarties to an ongoing case have an independen…
discussed
Cited "see"
Bennett v. Ridley
See Mizell v. Attorney General, 586 F.2d 942, 947 (2d Cir.1978) (interpreting 28 U.S.C. § 2243 , the federal habeas corpus provision), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1970).
cited
Cited "see"
Verrett v. Stempson
See Mizell v. Attorney General of New York, 586 F.2d 942, 947 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Cueto v. Singletary
See generally, Mizell v. New York, 586 F.2d 942, 947-948 (2nd Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979); United States ex. rel.
discussed
Cited "see"
Darden v. Wainwright
See, for example, Smith v. Mississippi, 373 U.S. 238, 239 , 83 S.Ct. 1265, 1266 , 10 L.Ed.2d 321 (1963), in which the order discharging a writ previously granted specifically provided that such disposition was “without prejudice to an application for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 after exhaustion of any state remedies still open ...” C.f., Shippy v. Estelle, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979), and Jurek v. Estelle, 430 U.S. 951 , 97 S.Ct. 1592 , 51 L.Ed.2d 800 (1977), in which mere denials of petitions for certiorari contained similar provisions con…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re: Sealed Case (Bowles)
See, e.g., Wilson v. Atwood Group, 725 F.2d 255, 258 (5th Cir., 1984) (en banc) (citing Mizell v. Att’y Gen. of the State of New York, 586 F.2d 942 , 944–45 n.2 (2d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 (1979)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Sealed Case
See, e.g., Wilson v. Atwood Group, 725 F.2d 255, 258 (5th Cir.1984) (en banc) (citing Mizell v. Att’y Gen. of the State of New York, 586 F.2d 942 , 944-45 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mario Alvarado-Garcia
Sec. 1326 . 5 On appeal, Alvarado-Garcia contends that any identity evidence, including the arresting officers' testimony that they saw him on the street prior to arresting him, should be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree because his initial arrest was determined by the district court to be illegal. 1 This contention lacks merit. 6 First, the "identity of a defendant ... is never itself suppressible as fruit of an unlawful arrest, even if it is conceded that an unlawful arrest, search, or interrogation occurred." INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032, 1039 (1984); see also United States …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hassett v. Far West Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
See also Mizell v. Attorney General, 586 F.2d 942 , 944 n. 2 (2 Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979); Rodgers v. Watt, 722 F.2d 456, 458-60 (9 Cir.1983); cf. James v. United States, 459 U.S. 1044 , 1046-47 & n. 4, 103 S.Ct. 465 , 466 & n. 4, 74 L.Ed.2d 615 (Brennan, J., dissenting from denial of cert.).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Kwang Fu Peng
It is true that a short continuance is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant a mistrial, see Dunkerley v. Hogan, 579 F.2d 141, 147 (2d Cir.1978) (“short” 7-10 day continuance does not provide “manifest necessity”), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1090 , 99 S.Ct. 872 , 59 L.Ed.2d 56 (1979); see also Mizell v. Attorney Gen. of the State of New York, 586 F.2d 942, 947 (2d Cir.1978) (continuance from Thursday until Monday did not require dismissal of jury), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979), however, in this instance the length of the continuance is uncertain a…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Julio Enrique Pineda-Chinchilla
See also United States v. Orozco-Rico, 589 F.2d 433, 435 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1518 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1978); United States v. Cella, 568 F.2d 1266,1285-86 (9th Cir.1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. O'Neil
See also Mizell v. Attorney General, 586 F.2d 942 , 945 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979); Kramer v. American Postal Workers Union, 556 F.2d 929 (9th Cir.1977); Demers v. Brown, 343 F.2d 427 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 818 , 86 S.Ct. 40 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Alvin O'Neil and Thurston O'neil, United States of America v. Charles Medlin, B.A. McFarland and B.E. McFarland United States of America v. Doko Farms, a Partnership, James Porter, Allison v. Barnett, L.D. Smith and William T. Curry, United States of America v. Paul Morgan, P & B Morgan Trust, Morgan Farms, Inc. And Wayne Greaves
See also Mizell v. Attorney General, 586 F.2d 942 , 945 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979); Kramer v. American Postal Workers Union, 556 F.2d 929 (9th Cir.1977); Demers v. Brown, 343 F.2d 427 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 818 , 86 S.Ct. 40 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Soter
See also Mizell v. Attorney General, 586 F.2d 942 , 944 n. 2 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967 , 99 S.Ct. 1519 , 59 L.Ed.2d 783 (1979) (where clerk fails to notify party of entry of judgment and counsel has diligently inquired as to status of case, district court may grant Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) motion to vacate and re-enter judgment to allow a timely appeal) (dictum). 7 .See also Advisory Committee Note to Rule 8002(c) (“If a timely notice of appeal is not filed, no appeal may be taken later.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Goosby
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 78-6209.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 19, 1979.
Published
G. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.