green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
12.0 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases, last quoted 1996 · 2 courts ·
…a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to rule 59(e) may not be granted where to do so would undermine the jury's fact-finding role and trample on the defendant's seventh amendment right to a jury trial.
⚠ not in text
Topic ↗
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 "but see"
United States v. James Sutton Regan, Jack Z. Rabinowitz, Steven Barry Smotrich, Charles M. Zarzecki, Paul A. Berkman, and Bruce Lee Newberg
(2×)
But see United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 , 1187-88 n. 13 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "but see"
In Re Wedtech Corp.
This approach to subsection (a) thus makes the corporation-enterprise liable under RICO when the corporation is actually the direct or indirect beneficiary of the pattern of *287 racketeering activity, but not when it is merely the victim, prize, or passive instrument of racketeering ... which result is in accord with the primary purpose of RICO ... to reach those who ultimately profit from racketeering, not those who are victimized by it.’ ” (quoting Haroco, 747 F.2d at 402 )); United States v. Hartley, 678 F.2d 961 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1170 , 103 S.Ct. 815 , 74 L.Ed.2d…
cited
Cited "but see"
Philadelphia TMC, Inc. v. AT & T Information Systems, Inc.
But see United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Freshie Co.
But see United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 , (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983) (speaking broadly and not discussing any potential distinguishing features among the language of the subsections, the court concludes that the “enterprise” and the “person” must be distinct entities throughout RICO).
cited
Cited "but see"
Griffin v. O'Neal, Jones & Feldman, Inc.
But see United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1190 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
James M. Abrahamsen James M. Abrahamsen, of the Estate of Gloria Jean Abrahamsen, Deceased v. Trans-State Express, Inc. Ronald E. Reagan
a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to rule 59(e) may not be granted where to do so would undermine the jury's fact-finding role and trample on the defendant's seventh amendment right to a jury trial.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Elizabeth v. Bogosian v. Woloohojian Realty Corp.
an owner of a business is competent to give his opinion as to the value of his property
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Midwest Precision Services, Inc. v. PTM Industries Corp.
a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to rule 59(e) may not be granted where to do so would undermine the jury's fact-finding role and trample on the defendant's seventh amendment right to a jury trial.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Midwest Precision Services, Inc. v. Ptm Industries Corporation, Midwest Precision Services, Inc. v. Ptm Industries Corporation, Appeal of Shawmut Bank of Boston, N.A.
a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to rule 59(e) may not be granted where to do so would undermine the jury's fact-finding role and trample on the defendant's seventh amendment right to a jury trial.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Itt Blackburn Co., a Division of Itt
(2×)
the rico 'enterprise' was identified in the indictment as the infonet division of csc, an organization which had no corporate existence separate and apart from that of csc itself
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Abu Ashonte Ali, A/K/A Marty Boldin, A/K/A Marty Boldwin
Id. at 1185.
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilson v. Connecticut Department of Transportation
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (5th Cir. Unit B 1982), reh'g en banc denied, 685 F.2d 1383 , cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 (1983) (waiving exhaustion where procedural anomalies related to class actions caused a plaintiff to miss his opportunity to file suit after receipt of the right to sue notice).
discussed
Cited "see"
Walker v. State
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, Inc., 685 F.2d 729, 740 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); United States v. DeLillo, 620 F.2d 939, 946-47 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 835 , 101 S.Ct. 107 (1980); United States v. Palacios, 556 F.2d 1359, 1363 (5th Cir.1977); United States v. Webster, 734 F.2d 1191, 1193 (7th Cir.1984); United States v. Dennis, 625 F.2d 782 , 795 n. 6 (8th Cir.1980); United States v. Long Soldier, 562 F.2d 601 , 605 n. 3 (8th Cir.1977); Scholz Homes, Inc. v. Wallace, 590 F.2d 860, 863 (10th Cir.1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
DeWane v. McGinty (In Re McGinty)
See, U.S. v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago, 747 F.2d 384 (7th Cir.1984), aff'd, 473 U.S. 606 , 105 S.Ct. 3291 , 87 L.Ed.2d 437 (1985); Rae v. Union Bank, 725 F.2d 478 (9th Cir.1984); Bennett v. Berg, 685 F.2d 1053 (8th Cir.1982), aff'd in part and rev’d in part, 710 F.2d 1361 (8th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1008 , 104 S.Ct. 527 , 78 L.Ed.2d 710 (1983); Hirsch v. Enright Refining Co., 751 F.2d 628 (3rd Cir.1984); Bennett v. United S…
discussed
Cited "see"
Vickie Fogie v. Thorn Americas, Inc.
See United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1190 (4th Cir.1982) (“[W]e would not take seriously ... an assertion that a defendant could conspire with his right arm, which held, aimed and fired the fatal weapon.”), cert, denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Vickie Fogie, Joan Leonard, and Angela Adams, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Thorn Americas, Inc.,.defendant - Thorn Emi North America Holdings, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, - Vickie Fogie, Joan Leonard, and Angela Adams, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Thorn Americas, Inc., Formerly Known as Rent-A-Center, Inc., - Thorn Emi North America Holdings, Inc., a Delaware Corporation
See United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1190 (4th Cir.1982) ("[W]e would not take seriously . . . an assertion that a defendant could conspire with his right arm, which held, aimed and fired the fatal weapon."), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 (1983). 30 Therefore, although we do not reach the ground upon which the District Court relied, we affirm the District Court's grant of summary judgment to the defendants on the plaintiffs' 1962(d) claim.
discussed
Cited "see"
Lama Romero v. Asociacion
(2×)
See Robinson v. Watts ___ ________ _____ Detective Agency, Inc., 685 F.2d 729, 740 (1st Cir. 1982), ______________________ cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 1204 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Lama Romero v. Asociacion
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, Inc., 685 F.2d 729, 740 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 1204, 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
James v. Texas Department of Human Services
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, Div. of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211, 1215 (5th Cir.1982) (holding that a right-to-sue letter is not a jurisdictional requirement but rather a condition precedent, which can be fulfilled after filing suit), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Harner v. Prudential Securities Inc.
See United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1187 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983). 27 .
cited
Cited "see"
In Re D.C. Sullivan & Co., Inc., Debtor. United States of America v. Robert Robinson, Etc.
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, 685 F.2d 729 (1st Cir.1982), ce rt. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 1204, 103 S.Ct. 728 , 1191, 74 L.Ed.2d 953 , 75 L.Ed.2d 436 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
53 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1814, 54 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 40,262 C. Roland Powers v. Grinnell Corporation, C. Roland Powers v. Grinnell Corporation
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, 685 F.2d 729, 742 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied sub nom Consolidated Service Corp. v. Robinson, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); Furtado v. Bishop, 604 F.2d 80, 98 (1st Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1035 , 100 S.Ct. 710 , 62 L.Ed.2d 672 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hall American Center Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Dick
See Entre Computer Centers v. FMG of Kansas City, Inc., 819 F.2d 1279 , 1287 (4th Cir.1987) (assuming a corporation can be part of association-in-fact enterprise, it cannot combine with other entities to form an enterprise when it is already the person whose behavior the Act is designed to punish) (citing United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1190 (4th Cir.1982) (“enterprise” refers to a being different from, not same as or part of, the person whose behavior the act was designated to punish), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983)); von Bulow…
cited
Cited "see"
Rose Bordanaro v. John McLeod Appeal of City of Everett, Edward Connolly, and Donald Bontempo
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, 685 F.2d 729, 732 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
New Port Largo, Inc. v. Monroe County
See Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dennis Skinner, and Cross-Appellant v. Total Petroleum, Inc., a Michigan Corporation, and Cross-Appellee
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, a Div. of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983); DeMatteis v. Eastman Kodak Co., 511 F.2d 306 (2d Cir.1975); Price v. Federal Express Corp., 660 F.Supp. 1388 (D.Colo.1987); Perry v. Manocherian, 675 F.Supp. 1417 (S.D.N.Y.1987); Ragheb v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich., 467 F.Supp. 94 (E.D.Mich.1979); Liotta v. National Forge Co., 473 F.Supp. 1139 (W.D.Pa.1979), aff’d in part, 629 F.2d 903 (3d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 970 , 101 S.Ct. 2045 , 68 L.Ed.2d 348 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Larkin v. Pullman-Standard Division, Pullman, Inc.
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (11th Cir.1982) (“the receipt of a right-to-sue letter subsequent to the commencement of a Title VII action, but while the action remains pending, satisfies the precondition that a plaintiff obtain statutory notice of the right to sue before filing a civil action"), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
William B. Larkin Louise Seals, as Personal Representative of Spurgeon Seals, Deceased Lillie Lofton, as Personal Representative of Edward Lofton, Deceased Jesse B. Terry, on Behalf of Himself and Others Similarly Situated v. Pullman-Standard Division, Pullman, Inc., a Corporation, Defendant- Louis Swint and Willie James Johnson, on Behalf of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated Clyde Humphrey v. Pullman-Standard, Bessemer, Alabama United Steelworkers of America Local 1466 and United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio, International Association of MacHinists Louis Swint, and Willie James Johnson, on Behalf of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated Clyde Humphrey v. Pullman-Standard, Bessemer, Alabama, United Steelworkers of America Local 1466 and United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio, International Association of MacHinists
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (11th Cir.1982) ("the receipt of a right-to-sue letter subsequent to the commencement of a Title VII action, but while the action remains pending, satisfies the precondition that a plaintiff obtain statutory notice of the right to sue before filing a civil action"), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Richard Bright D/B/A Augusta Dairies v. Land O'lakes, Inc. And Norris Creameries, Inc.
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, Inc., 685 F.2d 729, 739 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 and 459 U.S. 1204 , 103 S.Ct. 1191 , 75 L.Ed.2d 436 (1983)....
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bonanno Organized Crime Family of La Cosa Nostra
See United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1190-91 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); Morris v. Gilbert, 649 F.Supp. 1491, 1501 (E.D.N.Y.1986); Rodonich v. House Wreckers Union Local 95, 627 F.Supp. 176, 180-81 (S.D.N.Y.1985) (dismissing claims only as to defendant improperly alleged to be both “person” and “enterprise”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bass v. Retirement Plan of Conoco, Inc.
See, Kaiser Aluminum, etc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983) (motion to dismiss); Simmons v. Lyons, 746 F.2d 265 (5th Cir.1984) (summary judgment).
discussed
Cited "see"
Liquid Air Corporation v. Rogers
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, Inc., 685 F.2d 729, 739 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 and 459 U.S. 1204 , 103 S.Ct. 1191 , 75 L.Ed.2d 436 (1983). 7 IV.
discussed
Cited "see"
Posey v. Bank of Shaw (In Re Posey)
See, U.S. v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago, 747 F.2d 384 (7th Cir.1984), aff'd, 473 U.S. 606 , 105 S.Ct. 3291 , 87 L.Ed.2d 437 (1985); Rae v. Union Bank, 725 F.2d 478 (9th Cir.1984); Bennett v. Berg, 685 F.2d 1053 (8th Cir.1982), aff'd in part and rev’d in part, 710 F.2d 1361 (8th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1008 , 104 S.Ct. 527 , 78 L.Ed.2d 710 (1983); Hirsch v. Enright Refining Co., 751 F.2d 628 (3rd Cir.1984); Bennett v. United S…
cited
Cited "see"
Liquid Air Corp. v. Rogers
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, Inc., 685 F.2d 729, 739 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 5.
cited
Cited "see"
Willard Larry Mabrey v. Roy Whites Florist, Inc., Roy White, Sr., Edward White, Margaret White, Jimmy White
See Pinkard-Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211 , 1215 (5th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 (1983); Soble v. University of Maryland, 572 F. Supp. 1509 (D.Md. 1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Klapper v. Commonwealth Realty Trust
See United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 , 1190-91 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983) (the distinction applies); Contra, Haroco, Inc. v. American Nat.
cited
Cited "see"
Otto Bintz v. Nsu Board Odu Board Governor of Virginia
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, a Division of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211, 1216 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
James Clark v. Amoco Production Co., Etc.
See Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales, Inc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045, 1050 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Edwards v. United States
See United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); United States v. Brien, 617 F.2d 299 , 310 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 919 , 100 S.Ct. 1854 , 64 L.Ed.2d 273 (1980); United States v. Boggs, 739 F.2d 1376 , 1378 n. 2 (8th Cir. 1984); United States v. Schaffner, 715 F.2d 1099, 1102 (6th Cir.1983); United States v. Fern, 696 F.2d 1269, 1273-74 (11th Cir.1983); United States v. Mackie, 681 F.2d 1121, 1123 (9th Cir.1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. A-A-A Electrical Company, Inc. & William T. Wilson
See Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales, Inc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045, 1052-55 , reh. den., 683 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.1982), cert. den., 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Donahue v. Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc.
See Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales, Inc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045, 1056-57 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Virden v. Graphics One
The Ninth Circuit rejected the plaintiff’s RICO claim and stated: “If Union Bank is the enterprise it cannot also be the RICO defendant.” Id. at 481 ; accord United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F.2d 1181, 1190 (4th Cir.1982) (“We conclude that ‘enterprise’ was meant to refer to a being different from, not the same as or part of, the person whose behavior the act was designed to prohibit, and, failing that, to punish.”) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); Lopez v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 591 F.Supp. 581, 585 (N.D.Cal.1984) (“[I]f an…
discussed
Cited "see"
Texas Utilities Co. v. Santa Fe Industries, Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See discussion in Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Sales, Inc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045, 1052-1054 (5th Cir.1982), ce rt. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Articles of Drug Consisting of the Following: 5,906 Boxes, Etc., United States of America v. Alcon Laboratories (Puerto Rico), Inc.
The standard for reviewing a judgment n.o.v. is similar if not identical: “The motion is properly granted only when, as a matter of law, no conclusion but one can be drawn.” Rios v. Empresas Lineas Maritimas Argentinas, 575 F.2d 986, 990 (1st Cir.1978); accord, Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, 685 F.2d 729, 733 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 and 459 U.S. 1204 , 103 S.Ct. 1191 , 75 L.Ed.2d 436 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Theodore MacK Receiver, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Wade Newton, Defendants-Third-Party Equico Lessors, Inc., Defendant-Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. G.J. Roberts, Sr., Third-Party Brazos Enterprises, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, 685 F.2d 729, 737-38 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 , --- U.S. ----, 103 S.Ct. 1191 , 75 L.Ed.2d 436 (1983); Klein v. Tabatchnick, 610 F.2d 1043 , 1048 n. 4 (2d Cir.1979); Jackson v. Star Sprinkler Corp., 575 F.2d 1223 , 1234 (8th Cir.1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mack v. Newton
See Robinson v. Watts Detective Agency, 685 F.2d 729, 737-38 (1st Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 , 459 U.S. 1204 , 103 S.Ct. 1191 , 75 L.Ed.2d 436 (1983); Klein v. Tabatchnick, 610 F.2d 1043 , 1048 n. 4 (2d Cir.1979); Jackson v. Star Sprinkler Corp., 575 F.2d 1223 , 1234 (8th Cir.1978).
cited
Cited "see"
O'Hare v. General Marine Transport Corp.
See Fire Equipment Manufacturers’ Association, Inc. v. Marshall, 679 F.2d 679, 681, 683 (7th Cir.1982) (OSHA standards), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph O'hare v. General Marine Transport Corp.
See Fire Equipment Manufacturers' Association, Inc. v. Marshall, 679 F.2d 679, 681, 683 (7th Cir.1982) (OSHA standards), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 728 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Souvenir Center, Inc. v. Historic Figures, Inc.
See Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales, Inc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc., 677 F.2d 1045, 1055-56 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); Electroglas, Inc. v. Dynatex Corp., 497 F.Supp. 97, 105 (N.D.Cal.1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Council v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner
See, e.g., Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (5th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (“We hold that the receipt of a right-to-sue letter subsequent to the commencement of a Title VII action, but while the action remains pending, satisfies the precondition that a plaintiff obtain statutory notice of the right to sue before filing a civil action under Title VII.”), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 (1983); Williams v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 721 F.2d 1412 , 1418 n.12 (D.C.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Save The Valley, Inc.
v.
Environmental Protection Agency
v.
Environmental Protection Agency
No. 82-637.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 10, 1983.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.