green
Positive treatment
13.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
State v. Phelps
(2×)
But see United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979); United States v. Cambindo Valencia, 609 F. 2d 603, 631 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 940 , 100 S.Ct. 2163 , 64 L.Ed.2d 795 (1980); United States v. Bell, 573 F.2d 1040, 1044 (8th Cir.1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
State Of New York v. Grand River Enterprises Six Nations, LTD.
See United States v. Fields, 592 F.2d 638, 644-46 (2d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 (1979) (SEC communications of evidence obtained by agency in course of civil investigation to U.S. Attorney did not warrant dismissal of subsequent indictment).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re: Aurora Commercial Corp.
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697 , 705 n. 10 (9th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979). "[w]hen a limitation on the period for bringing suit has been set by statute, laches will generally not be invoked to shorten the statutory period." See /kelionwu v. United States, 150 F.3d 233, 238 (2d Cir. 1998).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Safavian
See United States v. Slade, 627 F.2d 293, 306-07 (D.C.Cir.1980) (citing United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 580-81 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979)).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Hernandez-Sendejas
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Blackwell
Omnibus Brief at 17; see United States v. James, 576 F.2d 1121, 1127-32 (5th Cir.1978), modified, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Hernandez-Miranda
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Isidro Nieto
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 582 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Johnson
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). 11 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lang
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 579 (5th Cir.) (stating that under Fed.R.Evid. 104, "the judge alone decides preliminary questions which relate to the competence of evidence, and the jury decides preliminary questions as to the conditional relevancy of the evidence”), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Berry v. Chapter 13 Trustee
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697, 701 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979) (a “preponderance of the evidence” standard, not a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard is the proper standard of proof in judging estoppel claims).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Kenneth Charles Fragoso
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ernie Dimitric Caro, A/K/A Louis Caro
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). 3 .
cited
Cited "see"
Williams v. State
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 577 (5th Cir.1979), cert, denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Mervyn Harold Cross A/K/A Eric Cross, and Robert Carter Lodge
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Paul A. Bilzerian
(2×)
This executive agency is authorized to regulate the content of the documents and to investigate and prosecute violations of law based on the filings. 15 U.S.C. §§ 78m(d), 78u (1988); see United States v. Fields, 592 F.2d 638, 649 (2d Cir.1978) (filing prospectus which concealed material facts with SEC stated a claim under § 1001), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979); United States v. Kuna, 760 F.2d 813, 820 (7th Cir.1985) (sustaining conviction under § 1001 for false statement on broker-dealer registration); United States v. Di Fonzo, 603 F.2d 1260, 1263-64 (…
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Walker
See United States v. Fields, 592 F.2d 638, 647 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Unitank Terminal Service
See United Telecommunications, Inc. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 589 F.2d 1383, 1390 , (10th Cir.1978), cert. denied 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2839 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Taylor
United States v. Feola, supra, 651 F.Supp. at 1129 ; see United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Matos-Peralta
See United States v. James, 576 F.2d 1121, 1127-32 (5th Cir.1978), modified en banc, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Thomas Donald Chestang, A/K/A Donnie, and Roy H. Chestang
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 580-81 (5th Cir.) (before statements are admitted against a defendant under Rule 801(d)(2)(E), there must be substantial evidence that a conspiracy existed, that the defendant and the declarant were members of the conspiracy, and that the statements were made in the course of and in furtherance of the conspiracy), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed. 2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Forma
See United States v. Fields, 592 F.2d 638, 647 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed. 2d 284 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Enrique Almeida-Biffi
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Frederick Cody Magee, John Olin Buchanan, George Walter Hanson, Jr., and Robert Frank Norris
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jorge Arroyo, A/K/A Sergio
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.1979) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979); cf. Leal, 781 F.2d at 1111 (overturning a grant of a new trial, because the judge had erred in determining that an evidentiary error had occurred).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Zuluaga
See United States v. James, 576 F.2d 1121, 1127-32 (5th Cir.1978), modified in part, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Diaz v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
See United Telecommunications, Inc. v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 589 F.2d 1383, 1390 (10th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2839 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Young
(2×)
See United States v. Fields, 592 F.2d 638, 648 (2nd Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979); United States v. Lawson, 502 F. Supp. 158, 172-73 (D.Md. 1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Santoro
James Hearing Defendants seek a pretrial hearing to determine the admissibility of any statements the government may offer into evidence as coconspirator hearsay under Fed. *185 R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E). 31 This procedure, which is the preferred (but not required) practice in some circuits, see United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 246 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); United States v. Montemayor, 703 F.2d 109, 116-17 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 822 , 104 S.Ct. 89 , 78 L.Ed.2d 97 (1983); see generally United States v. James, 576 F.2d 1121, 1127-3…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ianniello
See United States v. James, 576 F.2d 1121 (5th Cir.1978), modified en banc 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir), cert.denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). 100 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Persico
Evid. 801(d)(2)(E); see United States v. James, 576 F.2d 1121, 1127-32 (5th Cir. 1978), modified en banc, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
John R. (Bob) Park D/B/A Action Real Estate, Cross v. El Paso Board of Realtors, and E. Dempsey Gunaca, Defendants-Cross
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 582-83 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert F. Burns v. United States
(2×)
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697, 703 (9th Cir. 1978) (estoppel), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Acosta
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979); Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Acosta
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979); Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2). 20 This Court has established procedures and standards for the admissibility of coconspirator statements congruent with the Federal Rules of Evidence.
examined
Cited "see"
Tosco Corp. v. Hodel
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697 , 705 n. 10 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Housing Authority Of Elliott County v. Bergland
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697, 701-05 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979). 28 Under this rationale, appellant is entitled to no relief on its claim for attorney's fees. 29 Accordingly, we AFFIRM judgment rendered for appellees for the reasons indicated. 1 The Act is styled "Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Act of 1978" and is designed to aid remote coal and uranium mining areas to alleviate demands for housing and public services in contemplated large numbers 2 The funds might be available under the following statutory language ( 42 U.…
cited
Cited "see"
Housing Authority v. Bergland
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697, 701-05 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Donovan v. Schmoutey
See U.S. v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697, 703 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979); California Pacific Bank v. Small Business Administration, 557 F.2d 218, 224 (9th Cir.1977). 56P.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Walter Lewis Clark, Iii, and George R. Newton, Moody Nichols, Defendants
See generally United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. Fuller v. Attorney General
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581-82 (5th Cir.), cert. denied 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979); People v. Goodman, 81 Ill.2d 278, 284 , 41 Ill.Dec. 793 , 408 N.E.2d 215 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Harold Haimowitz, Dan Scarborough, George L. Onett
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 578 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Walker
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Walker
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ammar
(2×)
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581 (5th Cir.) (in banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979). 20 Appellants contend that before allowing the introduction of any coconspirator statement the district court should have held a preliminary hearing at which the determination referred to above should have been made. 4 In United States v. James, 590 F.2d at 581-82 , on which they rely, the Fifth Circuit expressed its preference for requiring the government to establish the existence of the conspiracy and each defendant's participation in it by independent evid…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lawrence A. Hogan and Leonard J. Patricelli
See United States v. Fields, 592 F.2d 638, 647 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ammar
(2×)
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581 (5th Cir.) (in banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
James L. Rogers, III v. Tennessee Valley Authority
See United States v. Ruby Co., 588 F.2d 697, 701-05 (9th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2838 , 61 L.Ed.2d 284 (1979) for a discussion of the doctrine, and United States v. Wharton, 514 F.2d 406 (9th Cir. 1975) for a case in which the rule was applied to estop the Government.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. John Charles Richardson
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575, 581-83 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Saavedra v. State
See United States v. James, 590 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 2836 , 61 L.Ed.2d 283 (1979).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Robeson
v.
National Labor Relations Board
v.
National Labor Relations Board
No. 78-1414.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 4, 1979.
Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.