green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.9 score
“the english legal doctrine that the sovereign is immune from suit to which it has not consented has been applied by courts in this country as vigorously as it had been in england”
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
New Hampshire Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Markem Corp.
the english legal doctrine that the sovereign is immune from suit to which it has not consented has been applied by courts in this country as vigorously as it had been in england
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Oatney
See United States v. North, 910 F2d 843, 854 (North I), super- seded in part on other grounds on reh’g, 920 F2d 940 (DC Cir 1990) (North II), cert den, 500 US 941 (1991) (explaining that Kastigar hearings are conducted “for the purpose of allow- ing the government to demonstrate that it obtained all of the evidence it proposes to use from sources independent of the compelled testimony”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Festa v. New York City Department of Consumer Affairs
Thus this activity qualifies neither as a form of ‘intimate association’ nor as a form of ‘expressive association’ as those terms were described in Roberts [v United States Jaycees, 468 US 609 (1984)].” (Ibid.) “Although the Court in Stanglin did not expressly state that recreational dancing was not protected by the First Amendment, the analysis and holding of the Stanglin court make such a conclusion inescapable.” (Willis v Town of Marshall, N.C., 426 F3d 251, 257 [4th Cir 2005]; accord Walker v City of Kansas City, Mo., 911 F2d 80, 88 [8th Cir 1990], cert denied 500 US 941 [199…
discussed
Cited "see"
96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8373, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,963 State of Alaska Ex Rel. Yukon Flats School District, Unalakleet/neeser Construction Jv, Unalakleet Native Corporation, Neeser Construction Company, and Gerald Neeser v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government, A/K/A the Native Village of Venetie, the Venetie Tax Court, the Venetie Tax Commission, Gideon James, Lawrence Roberts, Larry Williams, Ernest Erick, Lincoln Tritt, John Titus, and David Case
See United States v. Cook, 922 F.2d 1026, 1031 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991). 25 Relying upon South Dakota and Martine, we have suggested that an inquiry into whether a Native group qualifies as a dependent Indian community requires an analysis of six factors: 26 (1) the nature of the area; (2) the relationship of the area inhabitants to Indian tribes and the federal government; and, (3) the established practice of government agencies toward that area; .... ( the degree of federal ownership of and control over the area; ( the degree of cohesive…
cited
Cited "see"
Alaska ex rel. Yukon Flats School District v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government
See United States v. Cook, 922 F.2d 1026, 1031 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Daniel M. Paradies, the Paradies Shops, Inc., Paradies Midfield Corporation, Ira Jackson
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 909-10 (D.C.Cir.1990), modified on other grounds, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C.Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Paradies
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 909-10 (D.C.Cir.1990), modified on other grounds, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C.Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Gutierrez
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 856-60 (D.C.Cir.), revised on rehearing, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C.Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp. And Michael D. Jones, Defendants-Counterclaim the First F.A., Defendant-Counterclaim Sherman Dantzler and Jack Shirek, and the First F.A. Of Orlando and Resolution Trust Corp., Counter-Defendants. Michael D. Jones, Robert S. Guskiweicz, R.S. Futch, Jr. v. Resolution Trust Corp., Defendant-Third Party Philip Donlevy, William Crawford, Robert Stone v. Seminole Flying and Soaring, Inc., and the First F.A. Of Orlando, Third Party Resolution Trust Corp., Plaintiff-Counter v. Lake Pickett, Ltd., a Florida Limited Partnership Michael D. Jones, as General Partner, D/B/A Lake Pickett, Ltd., a Florida Limited Partnership Michael D. Jones, Individually and as Trustee, - Counter - - the First F.A. Of Orlando
See FDIC v. McCullough, 911 F.2d 593 (11th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991); Vernon v. Resolution Trust Corp., 907 F.2d 1101 (11th Cir.1990).
cited
Cited "see"
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp.
See FDIC v. McCullough, 911 F.2d 593 (11th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991); Vernon v. Resolution Trust Corp., 907 F.2d 1101 (11th Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Peters
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 870 (D.C.Cir.1990), reh’g granted in part and denied in part, 920 F.2d 940 , cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991) (rejecting Hinton’s per se rule of dismissal); United States v. Zielezinski, 740 F.2d 727 (9th Cir.1984), (requiring an evidentiary hearing in case of grand jury’s indictment of witness who testified before it pursuant to grant of immunity); United States v. Lipkis, 770 F.2d 1447 (9th Cir.1985), (no hearing required where defendant conceded that only minimal differences existed between his nonimmunized …
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Darryl Joseph Alexander
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 894-98 (D.C.Cir.), modified in part on other grounds, 920 F.2d 940 (1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bertoli
The right of compulsory process does not, therefore, entitle a defendant to subpoena witnesses whose testimony would be “collateral, rather than material, to the issues in the case.” United States v. Scopo, 861 F.2d 339, 345 (2d Cir.1988) (“If the court could properly have excluded proffered testimony on the ground that the evidence was collateral, its refusal to subpoena witnesses who were to give that testimony cannot be deemed error.”), ce rt. denied, 490 U.S. 1048 , 109 S.Ct. 1957 , 104 L.Ed.2d 426 (1989); see United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 890-91 (subpoena properly quashed …
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael Bartel
(2×)
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 870 (D.C.Cir.) (“Circuit law ... instructs us to allow the government an opportunity to make its case at a hearing, and therefore we decline to adopt the per se rule of Hinton.”), vacated in part, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C.Cir.1990.), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Brothers
See United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 854, 872-73 (D.C.Cir.1990), modified, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C.Cir.1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dicristina
See also United States v. Cook, 922 F.2d 1026, 1034 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991) (noting that the federal interest underlying the IGBA is the eradication of large-scale gaming); United States v. Farris, 624 F.2d 890, 895 (9th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1111 , 101 S.Ct. 919 , 66 L.Ed.2d 839 (1981), superceded by statute, Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, Pub.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Boney
JUROR BIAS As a general principle, post-trial juror-bias hearings are intended to provide the defendant, or moving party, with the “opportunity to prove actual bias.” Boney II, 68 F.3d at 501 ; Boney I, 977 F.2d at 634 (both citing Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 215 , 102 S.Ct. 940 , 71 L.Ed.2d 78 (1982)); see also United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 904 (D.C.Cir.1990)(citing McDonough, 464 U.S. at 556 , 104 S.Ct. 845 )(“Read along with the concurrences of five Justices, McDonough suggests that an aggrieved patty must show that the juror’s correct response at voir dire would have d…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Williams
For a gratuities offense, venue lies where defendants “give, offer, or promise” a thing of value to a public official. 18 U.S.C. § 201 (e)(1)(A); see also United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843 (D.C.Cir.1990), superseded in part, 920 F.2d 940 , cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rosario Montoya, United States of America v. Filiberto E. Montoya
(2×)
Compare United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843, 856 (assuming without deciding that a prosecutor cannot make non-evidentiary use of immunized testimony), modified, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C.Cir.1990) (en banc), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991); and United States v. Byrd, 765 F.2d 1524, 1531 (11th Cir.1985) ("It is our view that the privilege against self-incrimination is concerned with direct and indirect evidentiary uses of compelled testimony and not with the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. McGeeney
United States v. Olivero, 39 M.J. 246 (C.M.A.1994); Cunningham v. Gilevich, 36 M.J. 94 (C.M.A.1992); United States v. England, 33 M.J. 37 (C.M.A.1991); United States v. Kimble, 33 M.J. 284 (C.M.A.1991); United States v. Boyd, 27 M.J. 82 (C.M.A. 1988); see also, United States v. North, 910 F.2d 843 (D.C.Cir.), modified in part, 920 F.2d 940 (1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2235 , 114 L.Ed.2d 477 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Clifft v. Indiana Department of State Revenue
See also, e.g., United States v. North (D.C.Cir., 1990), 910 F.2d 843, 853-54 (citing Kastigar), reh'g granted in part on other grounds (1991), 920 F.2d 940 , cert. denied (1991), 500 U.S. 941 , 111 S.Ct. 2285 , 114 LEd.2d 477.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In re Alston
No. 90-7447.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 28, 1991.
500 U.S. 941
Published
Citer courts: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial… (1)
Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.