green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
9.3 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 44 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Vernon Trujillo v. Ronald Goodman
Wright, A. Miller, & F. Elliott, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2537 (1971 and Supp. 1986); but cf. Kinzenbaw v. Deere & Co., 741 F.2d 383 (Fed.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985); Martinez Moll v. Levitt & Sons, 583 F.2d 565 (1st Cir.1978); DeMarines v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 580 F.2d 1193 (3d Cir.1978).
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Edgar Reyes-Colón v. Banco Popular de Puerto Rico, et al.
courts which have considered the question of when an appeal ends and the clock begins to run again for speedy trial purposes have generally held that the applicable date is the date on which the appellate court issues its mandate.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Brooktree Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
if a party fails to specify an issue in its motion for a directed verdict, it may not subsequently challenge the jury's verdict on that issue_
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Florence L. Barbetta, and James D. Barbetta v. S/s Bermuda Star, in Rem, Her Engines, Tackle, and MacHinery Etc.
46 u.s.c. 183c expressly invalidates any contract provision purporting to limit a ship's liability for negligence to its passengers.
cited
Cited "see"
Jacobs v. Osmose, Inc.
See Kornberg v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 741 F.2d 1332, 1337 (11th Cir.1984), cert. 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Barnes
See United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 507 (1st Cir.1984) (“[I]t is not necessary for the court to articulate the basic facts when they are obvious and set forth in a motion for a continuance.”), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Barnes
See United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 507 (1st Cir. 1984) ("[I]t is not necessary for the court to articulate the basic facts when they are obvious and set forth in a motion for a continuance."), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Geraldo Rodriguez, A/K/A Jose Rodriguez
See United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 502 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); see also United States v. Montoya, 827 F.2d 143, 151 (7th Cir.1987); United States v. Velasquez, 802 F.2d 104, 105 (4th Cir.1986); United States v. Novak, 715 F.2d 810, 813 (3d Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 465 U.S. 1030 , 104 S.Ct. 1293 , 79 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hickey v. Wellesley
"The effect of the mandate is to bring the proceedings in a case on appeal in our Court to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction of this Court, returning it to the forum whence it came." Ostrer v. United ______ ______ States, 584 F.2d 594, 598 (2d Cir. 1978); accord United ______ ______ ______ States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir. 1984) ("it is the ______ ____ date on which the mandate is issued which determines when the district court reacquires jurisdiction for further proceedings"), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hickey v. Wellesley
"The effect of the mandate is to bring the proceedings in a case on appeal in our Court to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction of this Court, returning it to the forum whence it came." Ostrer v. United States, 584 F.2d 594, 598 (2d Cir. 1978); accord United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir. 1984) ("it is the date on which the mandate is issued which determines when the district court reacquires jurisdiction for further proceedings"), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Campbell v. Fasco Industries, Inc.
See Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 736 F.2d 394, 403 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
In the Matter of a John Doe Grand Jury Investigation
See id. " In summary, we hold that, since the subpoena was directed to the corporation, the corporation, which has no privilege against self-incrimination, can comply without implicating any individual's art. 12 protections.
cited
Cited "see"
Bennett v. United States
See Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 736 F.2d 394, 409 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Wang Laboratories, Inc. v. Toshiba Corp.
See Kinzenbaw v. Deere & Co., 741 F.2d 383 (Fed.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Air Crash Disaster at Detroit Metropolitan Airport on August 16, 1987
See United States v. Barth, 591 F.Supp. 91, 97 (D.Conn.), aff'd in part, rev’d in part on other grounds, 745 F.2d 184 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Mobile Materials, Inc. And Gerald O. Philpot
(2×)
See United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 504 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); United States v. McGrath, 613 F.2d 361, 366 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 967 , 100 S.Ct. 2946 , 64 L.Ed.2d 827 (1980); United States v. Novak, 715 F.2d 810, 815 (3d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1030 , 104 S.Ct. 1293 , 79 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984); United States v. Holyfield, 802 F.2d 846, 848 (6th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1090 , 107 S.Ct. 1298 , 94 L.Ed.2d 154 (1987); United States v. Fogarty, 692 F.2d 542, 546 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S.…
discussed
Cited "see"
E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
See Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 736 F.2d 394, 408 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); Glick v. White Motor Co., 458 F.2d 1287, 1291 (3d Cir.1972); New Amsterdam Cas.
cited
Cited "see"
Drury v. Feeney
See Louisiana State Bar Association v. Drury, 455 So.2d 1387 (La.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1358 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Biller v. Lopes
See United States v. Barth, 745 F.2d 184, 187 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum, 657 F.2d at 8 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Felton
See United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); United States v. Ross, 654 F.2d 612, 616 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 926 , 102 S.Ct. 1290 , 71 L.Ed.2d 470 (1982); United States v. Russo, 550 F.Supp. 1315, 1319 (D.N.J.1982), aff'd, 722 F.2d 736 (3d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1045 , 104 S.Ct. 716 , 79 L.Ed.2d 179 (1984). 40 In the case at hand, the question is whether the exclusion extends to any of the time that elapsed between the date this court originally issued its mandate and when we later …
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Felton
See United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); United States v. Ross, 654 F.2d 612, 616 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 926 , 102 S.Ct. 1290 , 71 L.Ed.2d 470 (1982); United States v. Russo, 550 F.Supp. 1315, 1319 (D.N.J.1982), aff'd, 722 F.2d 736 (3d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1045 , 104 S.Ct. 716 , 79 L.Ed.2d 179 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Moll v. U.S. Life Title Insurance Co. of New York
See United States v. Barth, 745 F.2d 184, 189 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Medine v. Washington Mutual, FA
See also Kornberg v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 741 F.2d 1332, 1336 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985) (focusing on “nexus” between the class representative’s claims or defenses and the common questions of law and fact among the class such that “the claims or defenses of the class and the class representative, arise from the same event or pattern or practice and are based on the same legal theory.”).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Staton
Compare United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 (1985) (issuance), with United States v. Ferris , 751 F.2d 436, 438-39 (1st Cir. 1984) (receipt).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Chorya A. Staton
Compare United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 (1985) (issuance), with United States v. Ferris, 751 F.2d 436, 438-39 (1st Cir.1984) (receipt). 53 We believe the decisions of the Eighth and Eleventh Circuits are more persuasive.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dudley v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Moreover, race must be “a determinative factor in the employer’s decision, though it need not have been the solé factor.” Rollins v. TechSouth, Inc., 833 F.2d 1525 , *786 1528 (11th Cir.1987); see also Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 736 F.2d 394, 402 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 1357, 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985) (circuit approval for “a determining factor” jury instruction); Cuddy v. Carmen, 694 F.2d 853, 857-58 (D.C.Cir.1982), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1034 , 106 S.Ct. 597 , 88 L.Ed.2d 576 (1985) (The plaintiff must “show by a preponderance of the evid…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Bruce Derek Spring AKA Bruce Derek Walls
The First and Third Circuits have stated that open-ended continuances to serve the ends of justice are not prohibited, provided “they are reasonable in length.” United States v. Lattany, 982 F.2d 866, 868 (3d Cir.1992), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 114 S.Ct. 97 , 126 L.Ed.2d 64 (1993); see also United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 508 (1st Cir.1984) (observing that “it is inevitable that in some cases, like the present one, a court is forced to order an (h)(8) continuance without knowing exactly how long the reasons supporting the continuance will remain valid”), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 100…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brook v. City of Montgomery, Ala.
To prove discrimination after the McDonnell Douglas framework drops out, a plaintiff can show (by either presentation of evidence or cross-examination of defendant’s witnesses) that the employer’s proffered reason was a pretext for discrimination, “[b]ut a reason cannot be proved to be ‘a pretext for discrimination’ unless it is shown both that the reason was false, and that discrimination was the real reason.” Id. at 515 , 113 S.Ct. at 2752 . 13 Moreover, age must be “a determinative factor in the employer’s decision, though it need not have been the sole factor.” Rollins v.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Douglas v. Evans
Age must be “a determinative factor in the employer’s decision, though it need not have been the sole factor.” Rollins v. TechSouth, Inc., 833 F.2d 1525, 1528 (11th Cir.1987); see also Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 736 F.2d 394, 402 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 1357, 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985) (circuit approval for “a determining factor” jury instruction); Cuddy v. Carmen, 694 F.2d 853, 857-58 (D.C.Cir.1982) (Plaintiff must “show by a preponderance of the evidence that age was ‘a determining factor’ in the employer’s decision” or that age �…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lamb v. Runyon
Moreover, age must be “a determinative factor in the employer’s decision, though it need not have been the sole factor.” Rollins v. TechSouth, Inc., 833 F.2d 1525, 1528 (11th Cir.1987); see also Monroe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 736 F.2d 394, 402 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 1357, 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985) (circuit approval for “a determining factor” jury instruction); Cuddy v. Carmen, 694 F.2d 853, 857-58 (D.C.Cir.1982), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1034 , 106 S.Ct. 597 , 88 L.Ed.2d 576 (1985) (Plaintiff must “show by a preponderance of the evidence that ag…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 21 Approximately 180 Kg. Bulk Metal Drums
See also United States v. Articles of Drug, 745 F.2d 105 , 119 n. 22 (1st Cir.1984) (a difference of opinion among experts does not present a genuine issue of material fact on the question of “general recognition”), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1358 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 21 Approximately 180 Kg. Bulk Metal Drums
See also United States v. Articles of Drug, 745 F.2d 105 , 119 n. 22 (1st Cir.1984) (a difference of opinion among experts does not present a genuine issue of material fact on the question of "general recognition"), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1358 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Fred J. Greene
Middleton, 690 F.2d at 825 ; United States v. Hudson, 431 F.2d 468 , 469 (5th Cir.1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 1011 , 91 S.Ct. 575 , 577, 27 L.Ed.2d 624 (1971) (stating “the use of drugs as part of religious practice is not constitutionally privileged”); see also United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 513 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985) (quoting Leary v. United States, 383 F.2d 851, 861 (5th Cir.1967), rev’d on other grounds, 395 U.S. 6 , 89 S.Ct. 1532 , 23 L.Ed.2d 57 (1969), and noting the narrow administrative exception of peyote from…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 225 Cartons, More Or Less, Of An Article Or Drug
See also United States v. Articles of Drug ... 5,906 Boxes, 745 F.2d 105, 117-18 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1358 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985) ("substantial evidence" standard not met where no showing of bioequivalency between drug in question and drug with studies on which manufacturer sought to rely). 38 The Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Generix Drug Corp., 460 U.S. 453, 454-55 , 103 S.Ct. 1298, 1299-1300 , 75 L.Ed.2d 198 (1983), defeats Sandoz's argument that it need not show the bioequivalence of the new and old FWC formulas before relying on studies c…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. 225 Cartons, More or Less, of an Article or Drug
See also United States v. Articles of Drug ... 5,906 Boxes, 745 F.2d 105, 117-18 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1358 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985) (“substantial evidence” standard not met where no showing of bioequivalency between drug in question and drug with studies on which manufacturer sought to rely).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Smith v. MCI Telecommunications Corp.
The typicality standard does not require that Smith, as the named plaintiff, “be in a position identical to that of every member of the putative class.” Aguinaga, 602 F.Supp. at 1279 (citing Rich v. Martin Marietta Corp., 522 F.2d 333, 340 (10th Cir.1975)); see also Kornberg v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 741 F.2d 1332, 1337 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hill
See, e.g., United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 514 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); United States v. Taylor, 683 F.2d 18, 21 (1st Cir.) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 945 , 103 S.Ct. 261 , 74 L.Ed.2d 203 (1982); United States v. Wright, 593 F.2d 105, 107-08 (9th Cir.1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hallsims Industrial Components
See also United States v. Barth, 745 F.2d 184,189 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1356 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985); In re Grand Jury Subpoenaes Duces Tecum, 722 F.2d 981, 986 (2d Cir.1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ronald Albert Lasteed
Compare United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 2370 , 86 L.Ed.2d 269 (1985) (issuance) and United States v. Ross, 654 F.2d 612, 616 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 926 , 102 S.Ct. 1290 , 71 L.Ed.2d 470 (1982) (issuance) with United States v. Ferris, 751 F.2d 436, 438-39 (1st Cir.1984) (receipt) and United States v. Crooks, 804 F.2d 1441, 1445 (9th Cir.1986) (receipt).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Richard R. Vieau and Robert A. Vieau v. Japax, Inc., Japax Scientific Corporation, and Textron, Inc., Defendants/cross
(2×)
See also Kinzenbaw v. Deere & Co., 741 F.2d 383 , 222 USPQ 929 (Fed.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985) (where court vacated a district court’s finding of invalidity following a settlement agreement on liability because injunctive relief was no longer possible since the subject patent had expired).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Joseph Shea Peeples
Compare United States v. Rush, 738 F.2d 497, 509 (1st Cir.1984) (appellants concede that waiver has effect), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1355 , 84 L.Ed.2d 378 (1985) with Pringle, 751 F.2d at 433 (appellants do not concede effectiveness of waiver). 2 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc.
See, e.g., Kinzenbaw v. Deere & Co., 741 F.2d 383, 387 , 222 USPQ 929, 931 (Fed.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc.
See, e.g., Kinzenbaw v. Deere & Co., 741 F.2d 383, 387 , 222 USPQ 929, 931 (Fed.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1357 , 84 L.Ed.2d 379 (1985). 106 Faced with its failure to have moved for directed verdict on willful infringement, Safety argues that its motion for directed verdict on infringement encompasses willfulness.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Groff v. Maryland
See also Hutcherson v. Board of Supervisors, 742 F.2d 142, 145 (4th Cir.1984), cert, denied, 470 U.S. 1004 , 105 S.Ct. 1358 , 84 L.Ed.2d 380 (1985); Strescon Industries, Inc. v. Cohen, 664 F.2d 929, 931-32 (4th Cir.1981).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rush
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 84-685.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 25, 1985.
Published
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (1) · S.D. California (1)
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.