green
Positive treatment
13.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Arzaga v. Santiago
Plaintiff “cannot avoid the bar of 23 res judicata merely by alleging conduct by the defendant not alleged in his prior action or by 24 pleading a new legal theory.” McClain v. Apodaca, 793 F.2d 1031, 1034 (9th Cir. 1986), citing 25 Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 26 (1982). 27 After careful comparison of pleadings in both actions, the undersigned finds that the first 28 criteria of claim preclusion is met because plaintiff’s prior action involved the same claim as the 1 current action, and infringement of the same rights.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
McDonald Corporation, a Delaware Corporation v. Rincon East, Inc., a Colorado Corporation Randolph West Investment Corporation, a Colorado Corporation
Id. at 1202. 8 In the present case, all of the requirements for claim preclusion have been met.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re City of Denton, Gerard Hudspeth, Mayor of Denton, Brian Beck, Mayor Pro Tem of Denton, Vicki Byrd, Paul Meltzer, Joe Holland, Brandon Chase McGee and Chris Watts, Members of the City Council of Denton, Sara Hensley, City Manager of Denton, and Doug Shoemaker, Chief of Police of Denton, in Their Official Capacities v. the State of Texas
See id. (citing City of Brookside Vill. v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790, 796 (Tex.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 (1982)). 37.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re City of Denton, Gerard Hudspeth, Mayor of Denton, Brian Beck, Mayor Pro Tem of Denton, Vicki Byrd, Paul Meltzer, Joe Holland, Brandon Chase McGee and Chris Watts, Members of the City Council of Denton, Sara Hensley, City Manager of Denton, and Doug Shoemaker, Chief of Police of Denton, in Their Official Capacities v. the State of Texas
See id. (citing City of Brookside Vill. v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790, 796 (Tex.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 (1982)). 37.
discussed
Cited "see"
City National Bank of Sulphur Springs v. John Alexander Smith
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, [T]hree distinct departments, each of which shall be 633 S.W.2d 790, 792 (Tex.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , confided to a separate body of magistracy, to wit: Those 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982)(city ordinance is which are Legislative to one; those which are Executive presumed valid unless the ordinance is unreasonable and to another, and those which are Judicial to another; and arbitrary); Hunt v. City of San Antonio, 462 S.W.2d 536 , no person, or collection of persons, being of one of these 539 (Tex.1971)(same).
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown, Patrick Marcel
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982); Ex parte Benavides, 801 S.W.2d 535, 537 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990, writ dism’d); Memet v. State, 642 S.W.2d 518, 522 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, pet. ref’d) (quoting Stansberry v. Holmes, 613 F.2d 1285, 1289 (5th Cir. 1 Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 21.6 provides: “The defendant must present the motion for new trial to the trial court within 10 days of filing it . . . .” See Tex. R.
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown, Patrick Marcel
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982); Ex parte Benavides, 801 S.W.2d 535, 537 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990, writ dism’d); Memet v. State, 642 S.W.2d 518, 522 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, pet. ref’d) (quoting Stansberry v. Holmes, 613 F.2d 1285, 1289 (5th Cir. 1 Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 21.6 provides: “The defendant must present the motion for new trial to the trial court within 10 days of filing it . . . .” See Tex. R.
discussed
Cited "see"
Dos Republicas Coal Partnership v. David Saucedo, as Floodplain Administrator and County Judge of the Maverick County Commissioners Court, and the Maverick County Commissioners Court
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d (b) It is the intent of the legislature that this code shall 790, 796 (Tex.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. exclusively govern the regulation of alcoholic beverages 570, 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Patrick Marcel Brown v. State
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex.1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982); Ex parte Benavides, 801 S.W.2d 535, 537 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1990, writ dism’d); Memet v. State, 642 S.W.2d 518, 522 (Tex.App.Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, pet. ref'd) (quoting Stansberry v. Holmes, 613 F.2d 1285, 1289 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied 449 U.S. 886 , 101 S.Ct 240 , 66 L.Ed.2d 112 (1980), “[a]ny statute or ordinance which proscribes certain conduct must be sufficiently definite to ‘give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that …
discussed
Cited "see"
City of Plainview Texas, William Mull, in His Official Capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Plainview Police Department, and Ken Coughlin, Capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Plainview Police Department v. Korey Ferguson
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, [T]hree distinct departments, each of which shall be 633 S.W.2d 790, 792 (Tex.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , confided to a separate body of magistracy, to wit: Those 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982)(city ordinance is which are Legislative to one; those which are Executive presumed valid unless the ordinance is unreasonable and to another, and those which are Judicial to another; and arbitrary); Hunt v. City of San Antonio, 462 S.W.2d 536 , no person, or collection of persons, being of one of these 539 (Tex.1971)(same).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lucas v. Lake County
See Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F2d 1199, 1201-02 (9th Cir), cert den, 459 US 1087 (1982) (claim preclusion applies to claims arising from the ‘same transactional nucleus of facts’); Drews[, 310 Or at 140-42 ] (tracing development of claim preclusion principle and affirming Oregon’s endorsement of transactional approach).” 201 Or App at 47 (footnote omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Aguirre v. Albertson's, Inc.
See Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F2d 1199, 1201-02 (9th Cir), cert den, 459 US 1087 (1982) (claim preclusion applies to claims arising from the “same transactional nucleus of facts”); 18 Drews v. EBI Companies, 310 Or 134, 140-42 , 795 P2d 531 (1990) (tracing development of claim preclusion principle and affirming Oregon’s endorsement of transactional approach).
discussed
Cited "see"
Big O Tires, Inc. v. BIGFOOT 4× 4, INC.
See Brunswick Corp. v. Spinit Reel Co., 832 F.2d 513, 523 (10th Cir.1987) (citing University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Prods., Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982)). “[W]hile laches may not be sufficient to bar a permanent injunction it may well be a bar to preliminary relief.
discussed
Cited "see"
Quick v. City of Austin
(2×)
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790, 792 (Tex.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982)(city ordinance is presumed valid unless the ordinance is unreasonable and arbitrary); Hunt v. City of San Antonio, 462 S.W.2d 536, 539 (Tex.1971)(same).
cited
Cited "see"
Goldson v. Carver Boat Corp.
See University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Britton v. Maloney
See Coffran v. Hitchcock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 7 (1st Cir.), cert, denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982) (citing test as whether the verdict is against “the clear weight of the evidence”); Borras v. Sea-Land Service, Inc., 586 F.2d 881, 887 (1st Cir.1978) (citing test as whether the verdict is against “the great weight of the evidence”).
cited
Cited "see"
Texas Manufactured Housing Ass'n v. Nederland
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982). 11 .
cited
Cited "see"
Colo. Manufactured Housing v. BD. OF COUNTY COM'RS
Accord Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Colorado Manufactured Housing Ass'n v. Board of County Commissioners of Pueblo
Accord Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Alshuler
See Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Imperial Corporation of America, Related Litigation. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity and as Receiver for Imperial Federal Savings Association v. Robert S. Alshuler, and Barclay Davidson, Michael Lea, and Anthony E. Maniscalco, Ii, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity and as Receiver for Imperial Federal Savings Association v. Mark L. Kline, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity and as Receiver for Imperial Federal Savings Association v. Robert S. Alshuler, and Gary M. Cypres
See Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Creative Computer Visions, Inc. v. Laser Learning Technologies, Inc.
Moreover, in consideration of the public interest, estoppel by laches may not be invoked to deny injunc-tive relief if it is apparent that the infringing use is likely to cause confusion. 4 McCarthy at § 31.04[1]; see University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.)(“Because laches is an equitable doctrine, its application is inextricably bound up with the nature and quality of the plaintiffs claim on the merits relevant to a prospective injunction.”), cer t. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA TEAMSTERS PENSION FUND v. McCORMICK DRAY LINE, INC.
See University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund v. McCormick Dray Line, Inc.
(2×)
See University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sara Lee Corporation v. Kayser-Roth Corporation
(2×)
Moreover, in consideration of the public interest, estoppel by lach-es may not be invoked to deny injunctive relief if it is apparent that the infringing use is likely to cause confusion. 4 McCarthy at § 31.04[1]; see University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.) (“Because laches is an equitable doctrine, its application is inextricably bound up with the nature and quality of the plaintiffs claim on the merits relevant to a prospective injunction.”), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sara Lee Corporation v. Kayser-Roth Corp
Moreover, in consideration of the public inter- est, estoppel by laches may not be invoked to deny injunctive relief if it is apparent that the infringing use is likely to cause confusion. 4 McCarthy at § 31.04[1]; see University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044 (3d Cir.) ("Because laches is an equitable doctrine, its application is inextricably bound up with the nature and quality of the plaintiff's claim on the merits relevant to a prospective injunction."), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982). _________________________________________________________________ 8 A…
cited
Cited "see"
Rash B. Ghosh v. California Department of Health Services California State Personnel Board Howard Hatayama
See Capitol Industries-EMI, Inc., v. Bennet, 681 F.2d 1107 , 1118 (9th Cir.1982), cert denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fleet National Bank v. Anchor Media Television, Inc.
See Fleet Nat’l Bank, 831 F.Supp. at 32 (citing Coffran v. Hitchcock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.) (trial judge may not set aside jury verdict merely because s/he would have reached a different conclusion than the jury), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982), and Borras v. Sea-Land Serv., Inc., 586 F.2d 881, 886 (1st Cir.1978) (trial court may set aside jury verdict only where verdict (1) is against clear weight of evidence; (2) is based upon evidence which is false; or (3) will result in a miscarriage of justice)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fleet National Bank v. Anchor Media
(2×)
See ___ -11- 11 Fleet Nat'l Bank, 831 F. Supp. at 32 (citing Coffran v. __________________ _______ Hitchcock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.) (trial judge ______________________ may not set aside jury verdict merely because s/he would have reached a different conclusion than the jury), cert. denied, _____ ______ 459 U.S. 1087 (1982), and Borras v. Sea-Land Serv., Inc., 586 ______ ____________________ F.2d 881, 886 (1st Cir. 1978) (trial court may set aside jury verdict only where verdict (1) is against clear weight of evidence; (2) is based upon evidence which is false; or (3) will resul…
cited
Cited "see"
Sanchez v. Puerto Rico Oil Co.
See ___ Coffran v. Hitchock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.), cert. _______ _____________________ _____ denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Sanchez v. Puerto Rico Oil Co.
See Coffran v. Hitchock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Jose L. Sanchez v. Puerto Rico Oil Company
See Coffran v. Hitchock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dallas Merchant's & Concessionaire's Ass'n v. City of Dallas
(2×)
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790, 796 (Tex.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Emory v. Miller
See Williams v. Shell Oil Co., 677 F.2d 506, 509 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982). 2.
cited
Cited "see"
Theede v. Veterans Administration
See id. (citing Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201-02 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982)).
discussed
Cited "see"
McEvoy Travel Bureau, Inc. v. Heritage Travel, Inc.
See Costantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1200 (9th Cir.) (approvals from ATC and IATA “are a prerequisite for a branch office to issue interstate and international airline tickets”), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Ocean State Physicians Health Plan, Inc. v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield
See Coffran v. Hitchcock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Sandra Conway v. Electro Switch Corp., Sandra Conway v. Electro Switch Corp.
See Coffran v. Hitchcock Clinic, Inc., 683 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1983); Hubbard, 626 F.2d at 200 ; Borras, 586 F.2d at 887 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Gackler Land Co. v. Yankee Springs Township
(2×)
Accord Brookside Village v Comeau, 633 SW2d 790 (Tex, 1982), cert den 459 US 1087 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Opinion No.
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ambrit, Inc., F/k/a the Isaly Company, Inc., Cross v. Kraft, Inc., Cross-Appellee
See University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044-45 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982); Conagra, Inc., 743 F.2d at 1517 n. 15. 75 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Ambrit, Inc. v. Kraft, Inc.
See University of Pittsburgh v. Champion Products, Inc., 686 F.2d 1040, 1044-45 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 571 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982); Conagra, Inc., 743 F.2d at 1517 n. 15. .
cited
Cited "see"
Gelb v. Royal Globe Insurance
See Constantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph Gelb v. Royal Globe Insurance Company
See Constantini v. Trans World Airlines, 681 F.2d 1199, 1201 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 932 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982), cz. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Harris v. NEWMAN MACH., CO., INC.
See Williams v. Shell Oil Co., 677 F.2d 506, 509 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Cason v. Texaco, Inc.
See Dorden v. Heist, 743 F.2d 1135 (5th Cir.1984) and Williams v. Shell Oil, 677 F.2d 506 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed. 933 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Opinion No.
See City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 (1982); City of Austin v. Teague, 570 S.W.2d 389 (Tex. 1978); Crossman v. City of Galveston, supra. The only question remaining is whether any specific state or federal laws limit these powers of a home rule city.
cited
Cited "see"
Ardith McPherson v. Walter Rankin, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Constable, Precinct One of Harris County, Tx and Harris County Texas
See Williams v. Shell Oil Company, 677 F.2d 506, 509 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1087 , 103 S.Ct. 570 , 74 L.Ed.2d 933 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
See City of BrookAide PillAge v. ComeAu. 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tu. 1982). zt. denfAd. 459 U.S. 1087 -(1982):ty of Austin v. Teague. 570 S.U.2d 38 3-bx. 1978); Crow&n 4; City Of GalVestOO. m.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Barnes
v.
Sanzo
v.
Sanzo
No. 82-672.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 13, 1982.
Published
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.