green
Positive treatment
5.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 25 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Bank of America Corp. v. Lemgruber
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, 943 F.2d 251, 254 (2d Cir.1991) (noting that § 1367(a) codified the availability of pendant jurisdiction), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Bodner v. Banque Paribas
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 254 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Henrietta D. v. Giuliani
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 254 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992). 10 .Plaintiffs had asked this Court to enjoin City defendants from altering or reducing the present structure and functions of DAS without showing how any alteration would better enable defendants to comply with their obligations to provide plaintiffs with meaningful and equal access to programs, benefits, and services.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bell
See United States v. Sloan, 939 F.2d 499, 501 (7th Cir.1991) (rejecting assertions that an individual was "not a taxpayer” and "not a person" subject to the tax laws as "simply wrong”), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 940 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992); Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1448 (10th Cir.1990) (rejecting argument that citizen of a state is "not a person” under the Internal Revenue Code as "completely lacking in legal merit and patently frivolous”); United States v. Dawes, 874 F.2d 746, 751 (10th Cir.1989) (rejecting individual’s assertion of being a "sovereign…
cited
Cited "see"
McNight v. Dormitory Authority of State of NY
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 257-58 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Bellovin v. United States
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 254 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cargill v. Turpin
(2×)
See United States v. Cross, 928 F.2d 1030, 1052 (11th Cir.) ("It is well-established that the improper admission of co-conspirator hearsay, like other Confrontation Clause errors, is subject to the harmless error rule ...."), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 985 , 112 S.Ct. 594 , 116 L.Ed.2d 618 (1991) and 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 941 , 117 L.Ed.2d 112 (1992); Cumbie v. Singletary, 991 F.2d 715, 724-25 (11th Cir.) (applying Brecht standard for harmless error after finding Confrontation Clause violation based on Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012 , 108 S.Ct. 2798 , 101 L.Ed.2d 857 (1988)), cert. denied, 510 U.S…
cited
Cited "see"
Hall v. Daka International, Inc.
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, 943 F.2d 251, 259 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Glinka v. Abraham and Rose Company Ltd.
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251 (2d Cir.1991) (state age discrimination claim derives from same nucleus of operative fact as federal age discrimination claim), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992); White v. County of Newberry, South Carolina, 985 F.2d 168 (4th Cir.1993) (state law claim of inverse condemnation and federal CERCLA claim both alleged hazardous waste contamination caused by the County); LaSorella v. Penrose St.
discussed
Cited "see"
Abdu-Brisson v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.
See id. (“Tf a state would not recognize a plaintiff’s right to bring a state claim in state court, a federal court exercising pendent jurisdiction, standing in the shoes of a state court, must follow a state’s jurisdictional determination and not allow that claim to be *111 appended to a federal law claim in federal court.’ ” (quoting Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 257 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992))).
cited
Cited "see"
Stratton v. DEPARTMENT FOR AGING CITY OF NEW YORK
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 258 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Spear v. Sowders
See Daugherty v. Campbell, 935 F.2d 780, 787 (6th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992)(affirm-ing denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds).
discussed
Cited "see"
Spear v. Sowders
See Daugherty v. Campbell, 935 F.2d 780, 787 (6th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992)(affirming denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds). 38 It must be recognized, however, that citizens do not lose all the protection of the Fourth Amendment when they visit prison.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Hakeem Olayinka Alli-Balogun, Also Known as Ralph Badmus
See United States v. Mickens, 926 F.2d 1323, 1328-29 (2d Cir.1991), ce rt. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 940 , 117 L.Ed.2d 111 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Harris v. Rivera
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, 943 F.2d 251 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Falik v. Parker Duryee Rosoff & Haft
See Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251, 254 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ebron v. United States
See, e.g., United States v. Mickens, 926 F.2d 1323, 1328-29 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 940 , 117 L.Ed.2d 111 (1992) (evidence that defendant made a hand gesture in the shape of a gun in order to intimidate a key prosecution witness was probative of defendant’s consciousness of guilt).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Fasciana
“Where a defendant claims that his conduct has an innocent explanation, prior act evidence is generally admissible to prove that the defendant acted with the state of mind necessary to commit the offense charged.” United States v. Zackson, 12 F.3d 1178, 1182 (2d Cir.1993) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 512 U.S. 1224 , 114 S.Ct. 2717 , 129 L.Ed.2d 842 (1994); see also United States v. Mickens, 926 F.2d 1323, 1329 (2d Cir.1991) (affirming admission of evidence of prior narcotics activity because it was “relevant to the second element of the money laundering charge, i.e., that [the defen…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Shankman
See also United States v. Cross, 928 F.2d 1030, 1039 (11th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 941 , 117 L.Ed.2d 112 (1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Deshais v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
See, e.g., Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, 943 F.2d 251, 259 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Tanzini v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A.
See, e.g., Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, 943 F.2d 251, 259 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kenneth R. THORNLEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PENTON PUBLISHING, INC., Defendant-Appellant
See, e.g., Promisel v. First American Artificial Flowers, Inc., 943 F.2d 251 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 939 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992) (noting eases ruling that social security benefits should not be set off from ADEA lost wages award, although not reaching the issue); Maxfield v. Sinclair Int’l, 766 F.2d 788, 793-94 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 796 , 88 L.Ed.2d 773 (1986) (refusing to offset social security benefits); Guthrie v. J.C.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. John Pascarella, Mark D'andrea, John Breheney
“Where a defendant claims that his conduct has an innocent explanation, prior act evidence is generally admissible to prove that the defendant acted with the state of mind necessary to commit the offense charged.” United States v. Zackson, 12 F.3d 1178, 1182 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 2717 , 129 L.Ed.2d 842 (1994); see also United States v. Mickens, 926 F.2d 1323, 1329 (2d Cir.1991) (affirming admission of evidence of prior narcotics activity because it was “relevant to the second element of the money laundering charge, i.e., that [the defendant] knew that the lau…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. United States
See, e.g., United States v. Sloan, 939 F.2d 499, 500-01 (7th Cir.1991) (rejecting contention that defendant was exempt from federal taxation as a citizen of a state but not the United States), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 940 , 117 L.Ed.2d 110 (1992); United States v. Price, 798 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986) (rejecting “special status” as state citizen argument); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 937 (9th Cir.1986) (rejecting argument that defendant was “an absolute, freeborn and natural individual” and therefore not a “taxpayer”); cf. In re Becraft, 885 F.2d 547 , …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Tropiano
See, e.g., United States v. Mickens, 926 F.2d 1328, 1331-32 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 , 112 S.Ct. 940 , 117 L.Ed.2d 111 (1992) (approving drug quantity estimate based on amount of money that changed hands); United States v. Jacobs, 955 F.2d 7, 9 (2d Cir.1992) (same); United States v. Prescott, 920 F.2d 139, 142 (2d Cir.1990) (relying largely on number of phone calls made and received in estimating quantity of drugs).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
First American Artificial Flowers, Inc.
v.
Promisel
v.
Promisel
No. 91-864.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 21, 1992.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.