green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.0 score
“once there has been an adjudication on the merits, federal law stipulates that all claims which are part of the same cause of action are extinguished, whether or not asserted in the original action”
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Andrews-Clarke v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.
once there has been an adjudication on the merits, federal law stipulates that all claims which are part of the same cause of action are extinguished, whether or not asserted in the original action
discussed
Cited "see"
Mike Smith Pontiac, GMC, Inc. v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.
See Weiner v. Blue Cross of Maryland, Inc., 730 F.Supp. 674, 676 (D.Md.1990) (noting that “[ujnder the common law, the procedure to enforce the judgment of one jurisdiction in another required the filing of a new suit in the second jurisdiction to enforce the judgment of the first,” and that “[t]he suit on the judgment was an independent action”), aff'd, 925 F.2d 81 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 816 , 112 S.Ct. 69 , 116 L.Ed.2d 43 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Young v. Young
It “enable[s] landlords to obtain possession of leased premises without suffering the delay, loss and expense to which, under the common-law actions, they might be subjected by tenants wrongfully holding over their terms.” Marsh v. Burhans, 79 Conn. 306, 308 , 64 A. 739 (1906); see Ossen v. Wanat, 217 Conn. 313, 317 , 585 A.2d 685 , cert. denied, 502 U.S. 816 , 112 S. Ct. 69 , 116 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Garcia
See Commonwealth v. Penn, 386 Pa.Super. 133 , 562 A.2d 833, 838-839 (1989), cert. denied 502 U.S. 816 , 112 S.Ct. 69 , 116 L.Ed.2d 43 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Betty G. Sanders, as Committee, General Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem for Henry Edward Sanders v. Cim Industrial MacHinery Inc., Formerly Known as C. Itoh Company Toyo Umpanki Company, Limited McLeod Equipment Company, Betty G. Sanders, as Committee, General Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem for Henry Edward Sanders v. Cim Industrial MacHinery Inc., Formerly Known as C. Itoh Company Toyo Umpanki Company, Limited McLeod Equipment Company, Betty G. Sanders, as Committee, General Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem for Henry Edward Sanders v. Cim Industrial MacHinery Inc., Formerly Known as C. Itoh Company Toyo Umpanki Company, Limited McLeod Equipment Company, Nelson, Mullins, Riley and Scarborough
See United States v. Joe, 928 F.2d 99, 103 (4th Cir.) (requiring party opposing strike to establish pretext if proponent of strike has established race-neutral explanation), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 816 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
Danny Jones v. Harold Plaster, Sheriff, in His Individual and Official Capacities
See United States v. Joe, 928 F.2d 99, 103-04 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 816 , 112 S.Ct. 71 , 116 L.Ed.2d 45 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Blotcher
Jones, 57 F.3d at 421 ; see also United States v. Joe, 928 F.2d 99, 103-04 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 816 (1991) (remanding where district court failed to make necessary Batson factual findings).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Lerry Blotcher, A/K/A Boogie, A/K/A Larry Blutcher, A/K/A Troy Wilson
Jones, 57 F.3d at 421 ; see also United States v. Joe, 928 F.2d 99, 103-04 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 816 (1991) (remanding where district court failed to make necessary Batson factual findings). 17 Blotcher contends that the district court erred in its Batson inquiry because it conflated steps two and three.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Knight
v.
Bell
v.
Bell
No. 90-1840.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1991.
Published
Citer courts: D. Massachusetts (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.