S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 490 U.S. 1039 (1989). · Go Syfert
Search
S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 490 U.S. 1039 (1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
43 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 17 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Midgley v. Rayrock Mines, Inc. (nmd, 2005-06-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" Midgley v. Rayrock Mines, Inc.
D.N.M. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. at 548 {citing Meagher v. Int’l Ass’n of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Pension Plan, 856 F.2d 1418, 1422 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1943 , 104 L.Ed.2d 414 (1989)).
discussed Cited "see" Dietz v. Cahill
W.D.N.Y. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Meagher v. International Ass’n of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Pension Plan, 856 F.2d 1418, 1428 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1943 , 104 L.Ed.2d 414 (1989); Gruby v. Brady, 838 F.Supp. 820, 831 (S.D.N.Y.1993).
discussed Cited "see" John Flanagan v. Inland Empire Electrical Workers Pension Plan & Trust
9th Cir. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See Christopher, 950 F.2d at 1221 , 1222 7 We applied the ERISA statute of limitation, with no discussion and no apparent consideration of an alternative, in Meagher v. IAM Pension Plan, 856 F.2d 1418 , 1421 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1943 , 104 L.Ed.2d 414 (1989) 8 Hogan v. Kraft Foods, 969 F.2d 142, 145 (5th Cir.1992); Meade v. Pension Appeals & Review Comm., 966 F.2d 190 , 194-95 (6th Cir.1992); Gluck v. Unisys Corp., 960 F.2d 1168, 1179 (3d Cir.1992); Johnson v. State Mut.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Romero v. Allstate Corp.
3rd Cir. · 2005 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Meagher v. Int’l Assoc. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Pension Plan, 856 F.2d 1418 (9th Cir.1988) (reversing dismissal of ERISA § 204(g) claim as time-barred from the date of amendment and reason *224 ing that plaintiffs were harmed by the wrongful application of the challenged amendment, not by its enactment), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1943 , 104 L.Ed.2d 414 (1989); Laurenzano v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Mass., Inc. Retirement Income Trust, 134 F.Supp.2d 189 (D.Mass.2001) (refusing to find ERISA challenge to lump sum distribution paid in lieu of an annuit…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Gene Romero v. The Allstate Corporation
3rd Cir. · 2005 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Meagher v. Int'l Assoc. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Pension Plan, 856 F.2d 1418 (9th Cir.1988) (reversing dismissal of ERISA § 204(g) claim as time-barred from the date of amendment and reasoning that plaintiffs were harmed by the wrongful application of the challenged amendment, not by its enactment), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1943 , 104 L.Ed.2d 414 (1989); Laurenzano v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Mass., Inc. Retirement Income Trust, 134 F.Supp.2d 189 (D.Mass.2001) (refusing to find ERISA challenge to lump sum distribution paid in lieu of an annuity that d…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Hackman (2×)
Ariz. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533, 537 , 108 S.Ct. 2529, 2533 , 101 L.Ed.2d 472 (1988). [3] "[T]he appropriate remedy for a violation of Massiah includes not only suppression of all evidence directly obtained through governmental misconduct, but also suppression of all evidence that can properly be designated fruits of that conduct." Kimball, 884 F.2d at 1278-79 ; see also State v. Bravo, 158 Ariz. 364, 374-76 , 762 P.2d 1318, 1328-30 (1988), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1942 , 104 L.Ed.2d 413 (1989).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. McGrath
Utah Ct. App. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence low
The courts, however, have refused to limit the application of Ceccolini to citizen witnesses testifying “out of civic duty.” Hooton, 662 F.2d at 633 ; see also State v. Bravo, 158 Ariz. 364 , 762 P.2d 1318, 1329 (1988), cert, denied, 490 U.S. 1039 , 109 S.Ct. 1942 , 104 L.Ed.2d 413 (1989).
Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.
v.
Federal Communications Commission and New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
No. 88-1249; No. 88-1250.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 24, 1989.
490 U.S. 1039
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

C. A. D. C. Cir. Motion of Communications Satellite Corp. for leave to file a reply as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied. Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and these petitions.