green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
7.9 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 37 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "but see"
Frank K. Kotarski v. V.L. Cooper, A.E. Navarro, W.J. Tinston, J.H. Kirkpatrick, Naval Air Rework Facility, Capt. P.A. Monroe, in His Official Capacity
Cf. Doe v. Duling, 603 F.Supp. 960 (E.D.Va.1985) (state statutes prohibiting fornication and cohabitation by unmarried adults unconstitutional), vacated on other grounds, 782 F.2d 1202 (4th Cir.1986); see also Thorne v. City of El Segundo, 726 F.2d 459 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 979 , 105 S.Ct. 380 , 83 L.Ed.2d 315 (1984); Wilson v. Taylor, 733 F.2d 1539 (11th Cir.1984); but cf. Andrade v. City of Phoenix, 692 F.2d 557, 565 (9th Cir.1982) (Wallace, J., concurring) ("neither the Supreme Court nor this court has held ... that extramarital sexual relations are constitutionally protect…
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Hood v. United States
we agree with the court of claims that the first amendment, standing alone, cannot be so interpreted to command the payment of money.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Austin v. United States
we agree with the court of claims that the first amendment, standing alone, cannot be so interpreted to command the payment of money.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Sheryl Taylor v. United States
we agree with the court of claims that the first amendment, standing alone, cannot be so interpreted to command the payment of money.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Fireman v. United States
merely forbids congress from enacting certain types of laws; it does not provide persons aggrieved by government action with an action for damages in the absence of some other jurisdiction basis.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Barron v. Spectrum Emergency Care, Inc.
See Colorado River, supra, 424 U.S. at 817 , 96 S.Ct. at 1246 ; Kruse v. Snowshoe Co., 715 F.2d 120, 122 (4th Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 465 U.S. at 1065, 104 S.Ct. 1413 , 79 L.Ed.2d 739 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ogden v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 886-87 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); Featheringill v. United States, 217 Ct.Cl. 24, 33 , 1978 WL 5755 (1978); Rosano v. United States, 9 Cl.Ct. 137, 142 (1985), aff'd, 800 F.2d 1126 (Fed.Cir.1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 907 , 107 S.Ct. 1350 , 94 L.Ed.2d 521 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert Glen Coe, Petitioner-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Ricky Bell, Warden, Respondent-Appellant/cross-Appellee
(2×)
United States v. Clark, 928 F.2d 733, 738 (6th Cir.) (quoting United States v. Grossman, 843 F.2d 78, 85 (2d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1040 , 109 S.Ct. 864 , 102 L.Ed.2d 988 (1989)), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 885 , 112 S.Ct. 240 , 116 L.Ed.2d 195 (1991); see United States v. McMahon, 715 F.2d 498, 501 (11th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1413 , 79 L.Ed.2d 739 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Shahsultan Jaffer v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 886-87 (Fed.Cir.1983) (in banc), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
U.S. Philips Corporation v. Sears Roebuck & Co.
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983) ("[T]he nature and scope of our review are not limited to the certified question, but ... we are free to consider all questions material to the trial court's order sustaining its jurisdiction."), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
U.S. Philips Corp. v. Sears Roebuck & Co.
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983) (“[T]he nature and scope of our review are not limited to the certified question, but ... we are free to consider all questions material to the trial court’s order sustaining its jurisdiction.”), cer t. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Zhang Jian Zhong
See United States v. McMahon, 715 F.2d 498, 501-02 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1001 , 104 S.Ct. 507 , 78 L.Ed.2d 697 (1983), and cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1413 , 79 L.Ed.2d 739 . 14 The practices of a $4 billion industry 15 should have myriad sources of proof, and industry insiders such as the Sunlight defendants should have ample access to these sources.
discussed
Cited "see"
Michael E. Hubbard v. Environmental Protection Agency, Michael E. Hubbard v. Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
(2×)
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 886-87 (Fed.Cir.1983) (en banc) (Claims Court did not have Tucker Act jurisdiction because First Amendment, by its terms, does not mandate payment of money), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984); Clark v. Library of Congress, 750 F.2d 89 , 103 n. 31 (D.C.Cir.1984) (same). .
cited
Cited "see"
Gwendolyn White v. United States Postal Service
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 887 (Fed.Cir.1983) (in banc), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984). 2 .
cited
Cited "see"
Hayes v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Campbell v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 887-88 (Fed.Cir.1983) (en banc), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984) (first amendment jurisdiction issue); Inupiat Community v. United States, 230 Ct.Cl. 647, 662 , 680 F.2d 122, 132 , cert. denied, 459 U.S. 969 , 103 S.Ct. 299 , 74 L.Ed.2d 281 (1982) (fifth amendment due process jurisdiction issue).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kellus v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 887 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984) and Gilmore v. United States, 6 Cl.Ct. 323, 325-27 (1984) aff'd without opinion, 765 F.2d 163 (Fed.Cir.1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Schroeder v. United States
See, generally, United States v. Connolly, supra, 716 F.2d at 886-88 , cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984); Fiorentino v. United States, 221 Ct.Cl. 545 , 607 F.2d 963 (1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1083 , 100 S.Ct. 1039 , 62 L.Ed.2d 768 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Willi Moeller v. Ionetics, Inc.
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 884-85 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984) (so holding for both 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (d)(2) and analogous provision 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (b)).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United States
Sys., Inc. v. United States, 57 Fed.Cl. 275, 276 (2003); see also United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Nebraska Public Power District v. United States
Sys., Inc. v. United States, 57 Fed.Cl. 275, 276 (2003); see also United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Klamath Irrigation District v. United States
Sys., Inc. v. United States, 57 Fed.Cl. 275, 276 (2003); see also United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Troutman v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims; “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 , reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 (1976)); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985)) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.C…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
J. Cooper & Associates, Inc. v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims, “it does not create any sub stantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 ), reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985)) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Osborn v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims, “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 ), reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985)) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.C…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Allustiarte v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims, “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 ), reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985)) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.C…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sullivan v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims, “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 ), reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985)) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.C…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bailey v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims; “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 , reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 , 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976)); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lakewood Associates v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims; “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 (1976)), reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.Ct.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. United States
The Tucker Act, however, merely confers jurisdiction on the United States Court of Federal Claims; “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages.” United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 , 63 L.Ed.2d 607 , reh’g denied, 446 U.S. 992 , 100 S.Ct. 2979 , 64 L.Ed.2d 849 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398-99 , 96 S.Ct. 948 (1976)); see also Saraco v. United States, 61 F.3d at 865 (citing In Zumerling v. Devine, 769 F.2d 745, 749 (Fed.Cir.1985)) (citing United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Loveladies Harbor, Inc. And Loveladies Harbor, Unit D, Inc. v. United States
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983) (in banc), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Globe Indemnity Co. v. Wrenn Insurance Agency
See, e.g., Kruse v. Snowshoe Co., 715 F.2d 120, 124 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1413 , 79 L.Ed.2d 739 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dixon v. United States
(2×)
See also, United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983), cer t. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Nelson v. United States
See also, United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Northern Indian Housing & Development Council v. United States
Biagioli v. United States, 2 Cl.Ct. 304, 308 (1983); see also Connolly v. United States, 1 Cl.Ct. 312 , 554 F.Supp. 1250 (1982), aff’d in part and rev’d in part, 716 F.2d 882 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. David Driver
See United States v. Sweeney, 688 F.2d 1131, 1141-42 (7th Cir.1982) (nondisclosure of medical reports concerning witness’s drug addiction was not prejudicial because contents of reports were elicited on cross-examination); see also United States v. McMahon, 715 F.2d 498, 501 (11th Cir.) (psychological report was not material because underlying facts were elicited on cross-examination), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1001 , 104 S.Ct. 507 , 78 L.Ed.2d 697 (1983) & 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1413 , 79 L.Ed.2d 739 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Phillips v. United States
See also United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984).
Trans World Airlines, Inc.
v.
Thurston
v.
Thurston
No. 83-997.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 27, 1984.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Federal Claims (4)
C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of Chamber of Commerce of the United States for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari granted.