green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.5 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“A court possesses inherent power to modify its consent decree.”
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 23 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Lovell Manufacturing v. Export-Import Bank of the United States
Although we have never ruled directly on the availability of pendent-party jurisdiction in this circuit after Aldinger , several cases have suggested strongly that such power may not exist at all here. 10 See, e.g., Wilkes-Barre Publishing Co. v. Newspaper Guild, 647 F.2d 372 , 376 (3d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1143 , 102 S.Ct. 1003 , 71 L.Ed.2d 295 (1982) (“the pendent state law claim against [defendants who were not party to the disputed collective bargaining agreement] can be entertained only if the complaint alleges some other nonfrivo-lous independent basis for district court ju…
discussed
Cited "but see"
Lovell Manufacturing v. Export-Import Bank Of The United States
Hoover v. Franzen, 669 F.2d 433, 438-45 (7th Cir.1982) (court must look to underlying jurisdictional grant to determine whether to exercise pendent party jurisdiction); accord Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 373 , 98 S.Ct. 2396, 2402 , 57 L.Ed.2d 274 (1978). 21 Although we have never ruled directly on the availability of pendent-party jurisdiction in this circuit after Aldinger, several cases have suggested strongly that such power may not exist at all here. 10 See, e.g., Wilkes-Barre Publishing Co. v. Newspaper Guild, 647 F.2d 372 , 376 (3d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S…
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection v. Gloucester Environmental Management Services, Inc.
a court possesses inherent power to modify its consent decree.
discussed
Cited "see"
Blake v. H-2A & H-2B Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Ass'n
See Aronson v. Servus Rubber, Div. of Chromalloy, 730 F.2d 12, 16 (1st Cir.), (although the court found that a termination of benefits that cut along independent lines, e.g., the elimination of a profit-sharing plan at one of two plants, and that had a readily apparent business justification demonstrated no invidious discriminatory intent), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Yenyo v. Communications Satellite Corp.
See 29 U.S.C. § 1343 (b)(4) (incorporating Tax Code definitions, 26 U.S.C. § 411 (d)(3)).” 905 F.2d at 1127 -28 (quoting Aronson v. Servus Rubber, Div. of Chromalloy, 730 F.2d 12, 16 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984) (brackets in original)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Harris v. City Of Philadelphia
See Sansom Comm. by Cook v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1535, 1539 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984). 7 27 The relevant legal principles are not difficult nor in dispute.
discussed
Cited "see"
Harris v. City of Philadelphia
(2×)
See Sansom Comm. by Cook v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1535 , 1539 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 (1984).7 The relevant legal principles are not difficult nor in dispute.
discussed
Cited "see"
Crumpton v. Bridgeport Education Ass'n
See Sansom Committee v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1552, 1553 (3d Cir.) (holding that modification of a consent decree took the form of an injunction and was an appealable order), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Crumpton v. Bridgeport Education Association
See Sansom Committee v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1552, 1553 (3d Cir.) (holding that modification of a consent decree took the form of an injunction and was an appealable order), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pickering v. USX Corp.
See Aronson v. Servus Rubber, Div. of Chromalloy, 730 F.2d 12, 16 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984) (section 510 prohibits discriminatory conduct directed against individuals, not actions involving plan in general). b.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Brazelton
See Copelin v. Alaska, 659 P.2d 1206, 1211-1212 (Alaska 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 (1984) (breathalyzer); Kuntz v. State Highway Comm’r, 405 N.W.2d 285, 288 (N.D. 1987) (blood alcohol content).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.
See Sansom Committee v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1552, 1553 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984) (holding district court order which extended a deadline provided in a consent decree to be "in the nature of a preliminary injunction" and appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (a)(1)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation
See Sansom Committee v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1552, 1553 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984) (holding district court order which extended a deadline provided in a consent decree to be "in the nature of a preliminary injunction" and appealable under 28 U.S.C.
discussed
Cited "see"
Cikora v. Wainwright
See Ferreira v. Fair, 732 F.2d 245, 248 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 430 , 83 L.Ed.2d 356 (1984) (holding there to be no due process violation where excluded testimony bore “none of the indicia of substantial trustworthiness that were crucial in Chambers”)-, cf. Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284, 302 , 93 S.Ct. 1038, 1049 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Smith v. State
(2×)
See also Copelin v. State, 659 P.2d 1206 (Alaska 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 430 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harris v. City of Philadelphia
See Harris IV, 35 F.3d at 844 (asserting appellate jurisdiction under section 1292(a)(1) over appeal of orders related to consent decree which imposed affirmative duties on City); see also Sansom Committee v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1552, 1553 (3d Cir.) (order extending a compliance deadline in a consent decree by 30 days was “in the nature of a preliminary injunction” and appealable under section 1292(a)(1)), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harris v. The City Of Philadelphia
See Harris IV, 35 F.3d at 844 (asserting appellate jurisdiction under section 1292(a)(1) over appeal of orders related to consent decree which imposed affirmative duties on City); see also Sansom Committee v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1552, 1553 (3d Cir.) (order extending a compliance deadline in a consent decree by 30 days was "in the nature of a preliminary injunction" and appealable under section 1292(a)(1)), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984). 31 The City claims that the Order of July 2, 1991 was not appealable because it provided that fines would be imposed in the fu…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hines v. Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co.
Bank, 728 F.Supp. 1210, 1225-26 (D.Md.1990) (denying summary judgment because termination of coverage only affected beneficiary); see also Aronson v. Servus Rubber, Div. of Chromalloy, 730 F.2d 12, 16 (1st Cir.) (suggesting in dictum that a plan could be discrimi-natorily modified), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Carl L. Farley v. Benefit Trust Life Insurance Company, Carl L. Farley v. Benefit Trust Life Insurance Company
See, e.g., Aronson v. Servus Rubber, Division of Chromalloy, 730 F.2d 12, 15-16 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984); see also Huber v. Casablanca Industries, Inc., 916 F.2d 85, 105-06 (3d Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Essex County Jail Inmates v. Amato
See, e.g., Sansom Committee by Cook v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1535, 1539 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, sub nom., Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania v. Sansom Committee, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pittsburgh Terminal Corporation v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, W. James Price, Alonzo G. Decker, Jr., James Parker Nolan, Frederick Deane, Jr., James L. O'keefe, Gregory S. Devine, Fay A. Le Fevre, Nicholas T. Camicia, Dr. Milton S. Eisenhower, Steven Muller, John K. Stevenson, Hays T. Watkins, Howard E. Simpson, and Cyrus S. Eaton, All Directors or Former Directors of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad And/or the Chessie System, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad and the Chessie System, Inc. Monroe Guttmann, Loretta Guttmann, Janet Rees, and Evelyn Bittner v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, W. James Price, Alonzo G. Decker, Jr., James Parker Nolan, Frederick Deane, Jr., James L. O'keefe, Gregory S. Devine, Fay A. Le Fevre, Nicholas T. Camicia, Dr. Milton S. Eisenhower, Steven Muller, John K. Stevenson, Hays T. Watkins, Howard E. Simpson, and Cyrus S. Eaton, All Directors or Former Directors of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad And/or the Chessie System, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad and the Chessie System, Inc. Appeal of Pittsburgh Terminal Corporation, Monroe Guttmann, Loretta Guttmann, Janet Rees, and Evelyn Bittner, in No. 86-3540. Appeal of Matthew E. Harlib, in No. 86-3542
See, e.g., Sansom Committee by Cook v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1535, 1538 , 1540 & n. 8 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984). 4 Such a motion is not an appendage to clarify or reconsider the original judgment but a matter having independent significance because it relates to a development occurring after the entry of the original judgment.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pittsburgh Terminal Corp. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
See, e.g., Sansom Committee by Cook v. Lynn, 735 F.2d 1535, 1538 , 1540 & n. 8 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 431 , 83 L.Ed.2d 358 (1984). 4 Such a motion is not an appendage to clarify or reconsider the original judgment but a matter having independent significance because it relates to a development occurring after the entry of the original judgment.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Annas v. State
See also Copelin v. State, 659 P.2d *560 1206 (Alaska 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017 , 105 S.Ct. 430 , 83 L.Ed.2d 357 (1984).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bland
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 83-6856.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 13, 1984.
Published
Citer courts: D. New Jersey (1)
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.