green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
11.7 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1997 ·
…there can be no criminal conviction for failure to disclose when no duty to disclose is demonstrated
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 43 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. George Vernon Hansen
See, e.g., United States v. Lopez, 728 F.2d 1359 , 1362 n. 4 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 112 , 83 L.Ed.2d 56 (1984); but see, e.g., United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671 , 677 n. 8 (10th Cir.1981), *951 cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Ago
But cf ., Abrams v. Reno, 452 F. Supp. 1166 (S.D.Fla., 1978), aff'd , 649 F.2d 342 (5th Cir. 1981), cert. den ., 455 U.S. 1016 (1982) (holding former s 103.091 [6], F.S. 1978, an unconstitutional abridgement of the associational rights of the Dade County Democratic Party since it prohibited such a committee from endorsing or opposing any candidate of its political party who sought nomination in any primary election).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Robert M. Cochran
there can be no criminal conviction for failure to disclose when no duty to disclose is demonstrated
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Cochran
there can be no criminal conviction for failure to disclose when no duty to disclose is demonstrated
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Sofa Gallery, Inc. v. Mohasco Upholstered Furniture Corp.
and we see no reason to expand judicially the scope of 1 of the sherman act to accommodate a claim that is already cognizable under another antitrust provision - 7 of the clayton act ...
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Frodyma
although 21 u.s.c. 374 authorizes fda agents to take samples of drugs during an inspection, and in rem action is required if large quantities . . . are to be seized
discussed
Cited "see"
Joblove, Allied Servs. v. Barr Labs. Inc.
See Valley Drug, 344 F.3d at 1306 (“[T]he reasonableness of agreements under the antitrust laws are to be judged at the time the agreements are entered into.”) (citing, inter alia, SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1207 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Joblove v. Barr Labs. Inc.
See Valley Drug, 344 F.3d at 1306 (“[TJhe reasonableness of agreements under the antitrust laws are to be judged at the time the agreements are entered into.”) (citing, inter alia, SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1207 (2d Cir.1981), cert, denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982)).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Tamoxifen Citrate Antitrust Litigation
See Valley Drug, 344 F.3d at 1306 ("[T]he reasonableness of agreements under the antitrust laws are to be judged at the time the agreements are entered into.") (citing, inter alia, SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1207 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982)). 49 As the plaintiffs correctly point out, the Federal Circuit would have reviewed Judge Broderick's factual findings underlying his conclusion of invalidity with considerable deference, rather than engaging in a presumption of validity.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bissell
See United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pharm., 651 F.2d 532 , 542-43 (8th Cir. 1981) (individuals who were “in business” together had Matlock common authority to consent to search of business premises), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Cynthia M. Stoner
(2×)
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 683 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982); see also Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 83 , 55 S.Ct. 629, 631 , 79 L.Ed. 1314 (1935) (holding that a variance is immaterial where it " `was not of a character which could have misled the defendant at the trial'" (quoting Washington & G.R.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Antony Michael Upton, Santa Barbara Castle Development Corp., A/K/A Castle Construction Corp., and Ronald R. Barrick
Accord United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 682 (10th Cir.1981) (the legislative history of § 287 does not indicate that Congress intended to make materiality an element of the statute), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James J. \Buck\" Allemand
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 680 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Daily, 921 F.2d 994 (10th Cir.1990), *927 cert. denied, — U.S.-, 112 S.Ct. 405 , 116 L.Ed.2d 354 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bankr. L. Rep. P 75,971 United States of America v. Vernon Robert Lindholm, Jr.
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d. 671, 676 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982), overruled on other grounds, United States v. Daily, 921 F.2d 994 (10th Cir.1991) (in prosecution for false statement to government agency, court held that leaving a blank is equivalent to an answer of none or a statement that no facts are to be reported).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Leo E. Kingston, Jr.
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 678 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982) (holding that “section 1001 prosecutions are not limited to statements which are required to be made by law or regulation”).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Victor Parsons
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 682 (10th Cir.1981), cert, denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Raymond T. Brittain
(2×)
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 675-76 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Sammy G. Daily and Frederik A. Figge
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d at 671, 677 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982); Gonzales, 286 F.2d at 122 (citing Weinstock v. United States, 231 F.2d 699 (D.C.Cir.1956)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Axis, S.P.A. v. Micafil, Inc.
See SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982); Kobe, Inc. v. Dempsey Pump Co., 198 F.2d 416 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 837 , 73 S.Ct. 46 , 97 L.Ed. 651 (1952).
discussed
Cited "see"
Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Committee
(2×)
See Abrams v. Reno, 452 F. Supp. 1166, 1171-1172 (SD Fla. 1978), aff’d, 649 F. 2d 342 (CA5 1981), cert. denied, 455 U. S. 1016 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Stanley P. Gimbel
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 678 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
International Wood Processors v. Power Dry, Inc.
See SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1203 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Francisco Larranaga
(2×)
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 685 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Gimbel
See United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 678-79 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Gel Spice Co., Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 651 F.2d 532, 543 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982); United States v. Dudgeon, 279 F.Supp. 300, 302 (D.Mass.1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bernard P. Elkin, A/K/A \Bob Elkin
Accord United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 682 (10th Cir.1981) (legislative history of § 287 does not indicate that Congress intended that materiality be an element), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982); but see United States v. Adler, 623 F.2d 1287 , 1291 n. 5 (8th Cir.1980) (requiring proof of materiali *1010 ty); United States v. Snider, 502 F.2d 645 , 652 n. 12 (4th Cir.1974) (same).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Marvin P. Johnson, Robert A. Wilkins, Duane Quamina, Patricia Gordon, Mark Francis Johnson
Van Liew , however, involved the demonstrably different situation where one of the conspiratorial objectives listed in the indictment actually failed to state a criminal offense. 321 F.2d at 672 ; see Griffin, 699 F.2d at 1104 n. 9 (drawing same distinction with United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671 (10th Cir.1981), ce rt. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982), which followed Van Liew.) Compare United States v. Carman, 577 F.2d 556, 567 (9th Cir.1978) (following Van Liew , but requiring reversal only in cases where the charged substantive offense fails to state a crime)…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Articles of Drug Consisting of Following: An Undetermined Quantity of 100-Capsule Bottles, Labeled in Part: (Bottle) Imported From New Zealand Neptone Lyophilizied-Homogenized Mussels
See United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 651 F.2d 532 , 538-39 & n. 10 (8th Cir.1981), cert. den. 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ANTONY MICHAEL UPTON, SANTA BARBARA CASTLE DEVELOPMENT CORP., a/k/a Castle Construction Corp., and RONALD R. BARRICK
Accord United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 682 (10th Cir. 1981) (the legislative history of § 287 does not indicate that Congress intended to make materiality an element of the statute), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Subpoenas Duces Tecum Nos. A99-0001, A99-0002, A99-0003 & A99-0004
See also United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 651 F.2d 532 (8th Cir.1981) cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982); United States v. Schiffman, 572 F.2d 1137 (5th *733 Cir.1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Midwestern MacHinery Co., Inc. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.
See du Pont, 353 U.S. at 607 ; SCFC ILC, 801 F.Supp. at 525 ; see also International Railways of Central America v. United Brands Co., 532 F.2d 231 (2d Cir.1976) (recognizing a use of stock to impose section 7 damage liability), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 835 , 97 S.Ct. 101 , 50 L.Ed.2d 100 (1976) SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 463 F.Supp. 983 (D.Conn.1978) (analyzing “holding” theory and determining that an impermissible use must be involved), affirmed and remanded on other grounds, 645 F.2d 1195 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1708 , 72 L.Ed.2d 132 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gill v. State of Rhode Island
Eu v. San Francisco Democratic Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 229 , 109 S.Ct. 1013, 1023 , 103 L.Ed.2d 271 (1989); see also Abrams v. Reno, 452 F.Supp. 1166, 1171-72 (S.D.Fla.1978), aff'd, 649 F.2d 342 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1710 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982) (holding Florida’s statutory ban on primary endorsements by political parties unconstitutional).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kaspar Wire Works, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. K-Jack Engineering Co., Inc., and Micro-Magnetic Liquidation Trust, Third-Party
See, e.g., SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195, 1205 (2d Cir.1981) ("[A] Sec. 2 violation will have occurred where ... the dominant competitor in a market acquires a patent covering a substantial share of the same market that he knows when added to his existing share will afford him monopoly power.") (emphasis added), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Justice
See, e.g., United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 651 F.2d 532, 542-43 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982) (business partner of professional corporation with unlimited access to work area had authority to consent to search); United States v. Harte-Hanks Newspapers, 254 F.2d 366, 369 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 357 U.S. 938 , 78 S.Ct. 1385 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1551 (1958) (no illegal search and seizure where corporation representative consented to government's entry onto corporate premises and later voluntarily provided corporate documents…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Hinckley, No. Cr 91-72600 (Jun. 1, 1992)
See, e.g., United States v. Irwin, 654 P.2d 671 , 681-82 (10th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982) (where the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to dismiss).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Griffin v. United States
(2×)
See, e. g., United States v. Irwin, 654 F. 2d 671, 680 (CA10 1981), cert. denied, 455 U. S. 1016 (1982); United States v. Head, 641 F. 2d 174, 178-179 (CA4 1981), cert. denied, 462 U. S. 1132 (1983); United States v. Kavazanjian, 623 F. 2d 730, 739-740 (CA1 1980); United States v. Carman, 577 F. 2d 556, 567-568 (CA9 1978); United States v. Baranski, 484 F. 2d 556, 560-561 (CA7 1973); Van Liew v. United States, 321 F. 2d 664, 672 (CA5 1963).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Joann Mitcheltree
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pkarm., 651 F.2d 532 , 543-50 (8th Cir.1981) (counterfeit drug operation), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982); United States v. Barnett, 587 F.2d 252 , 254 n. 1, 257 (5th Cir.1979) (adulterated cottonseed meal), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 923 , 99 S.Ct. 2031 , 60 L.Ed.2d 396 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Zapata
(2×)
People v. Shackelford, 182 Colo. 48 , 511 P.2d 19 (1973); see also United States v. Irwin, 654 P.2d 671 (10th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rex S. Taylor
It is fundamental that “[a] defendant cannot complain of error which he invited upon himself.” United States v. Riebold, 557 F.2d 697, 708 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 860 , 98 S.Ct. 186 , 54 L.Ed.2d 133 (1977); see also United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671, 676-77 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Collins
People v. Shackelford, 182 Colo. 48 , 511 P.2d 19 (1973); see also United States v. Irwin, 654 F.2d 671 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 , 72 L.Ed.2d 133 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Torigian Laboratories, Inc.
See also United States v. Jamieson-McKames Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 651 F.2d 532, 536-40 (8th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1016 , 102 S.Ct. 1709 [ 72 L.Ed.2d 133 ] (1982); United States v. New England Grocers Supply Co., 488 F.Supp. 230, 237-39 (D.Mass.1980). 4.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Briscoe
v.
LaHue
v.
LaHue
No. 81-1404.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 22, 1982.
C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of petitioners Chris P. Vickers, Sr., and James N. Ballard for leave to proceed informa pauperis and certiorari granted.