green
Positive treatment
5.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Miskovitch v. Hostoffer
See Schowengerdt v. United States, 944 F.2d 483 (9th Cir.1991) (allegations in a complaint which are based on inference and speculation cannot defeat a motion for summary judgment on a conspiracy claim), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1514 , 117 L.Ed.2d 650 (1992); D.R., a minor v. Middle Bucks Area Vocational Technical School, 972 F.2d 1364 (3d Cir.1992) (the plaintiffs failed to show that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to interfere with the Plaintiffs’ civil rights); City of Omaha Betterment Association v. City of Omaha, 883 F.2d 650 (8th Cir.1989) (evidence was insufficien…
discussed
Cited "see"
Lombardo v. Lombardo
See Heggy v. Heggy, 944 F.2d 1537 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1514 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992); Kempf v. Kempf, 868 F.2d 970 (8th Cir.1989); Pritchard v. Pritchard, 732 F.2d 372 (4th Cir.1984); United States v. Jones, 542 F.2d 661 (6th Cir.1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
State of Indiana v. John Lombardo
See Heggy v. Heggy, 944 F.2d 1537, 1538 (10th Cir. 1991) (holding that the Federal Wiretap Act “does apply to interspousal wiretapping within the marital home”), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 (1992)); Kempf v. Kempf, 868 F.2d 970, 973 (8th Cir. 1989) (holding that “the conduct of a spouse in wiretapping the telephone communications of the other spouse within the marital home, falls within [the Federal Wiretap Act’s] purview”); Pritchard v. Pritchard, 732 F.2d 372, 374 (4th Cir. 1984) (stating that there is no “indication in the statutory language or in the legislative history that Con…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Lombardo
See Heggy v. Heggy, 944 F.2d 1537, 1538 (10th Cir.1991) (holding that the Federal Wiretap Act "does apply to inter-spousal wiretapping within the marital home"), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1514 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992); Kempf v. Kempf, 868 F.2d 970, 973 (8th Cir.1989) (holding that “the conduct of a spouse in wiretapping the telephone communications of the other spouse within the marital home, falls within [the Federal Wiretap Act’s] purview”); Pritchard v. Pritchard, 732 F.2d 372, 374 (4th Cir.1984) (stating that there is no "indication in the statutory language or in the le…
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Vieux
See Heggy v. Heggy, 944 F.2d 1537, 1540 (10th Cir. 1991), cert, denied, 503 U.S. 951 (1992) (reference to “any person” in portion of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2520 relating to statute’s scope of application construed to include private citizens); Commonwealth v. Santoro, 406 Mass. 421, 423 (1990) (G.
cited
Cited "see"
95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9376, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 16,355 United States of America v. Anthony C. Sarno and Charles W. Knapp, (Two Cases). United States of America v. Joseph v. Nash
See United States v. Smith, 944 F.2d 618, 623 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1515 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Sarno
See United States v. Smith, 944 F.2d 618, 623 (9th Cir.1991), ce rt. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1515 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Kenneth E. Haddock
See United States v. Smith, 944 F.2d 618, 621-22 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1515 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992) (FSLIC treated as proper recipient of restitution due to assignment of assets including claims); United States v. Rochester, 898 F.2d 971 , 980 n. 7 (5th Cir.1990) (same); United States v. Ryan, 874 F.2d 1052, 1053 (5th Cir.1989) (same).
discussed
Cited "see"
DeMuth v. Miller
(2×)
See Schowengerdt v. United States, 944 F.2d 483 , 490 n. 8 (9th Cir.1991) (distinguishing equal protection from substantive due process challenge to military policy), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1514 , 117 L.Ed.2d 650 (1992); Evans v. Romer, 882 P.2d 1335, 1349-50, *40-41 (Oct. 11,1994) (holding state initiative barring protection against discrimination aimed at homosexuals unconstitutional and concluding that Hardwick decision on right to privacy does not abate other rights of homosexuals); Prof.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dugan
Compare United States v. Smith, 964 F.2d 885, 887 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1515 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992) *1210 with Addonizio, 442 U.S. at 186-187 , 99 S.Ct. 2235 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shahram DAVOUDI, Defendant-Appellant
See, e.g., United States v. Smith, 944 F.2d 618, 624 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1515 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Samuel B. Pollock Jr. And Laura Pollock v. Sandra T. Pollock, Oliver H. Barber, and Luann C. Glidewell
See also Heggy v. Heggy, 944 F.2d 1537, 1539 (10th Cir.1991) (holding that "Title III does apply to interspousal wiretapping within the home”), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1514 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992); Kempf v. Kempf, 868 F.2d 970, 973 (8th Cir.1989) (holding that “the conduct of a spouse in wiretapping the telephone communications of the other spouse within the marital home falls within [Title Ill’s] purview”); Pritchard v. Pritchard, 732 F.2d 372, 374 (4th Cir.1984) (stating that there is "no legislative history that Congress intended to imply an exception to facts involv…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jerry Allen Silva
Compare United States v. Smith, 964 F.2d 885, 887 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 (1992) with Addonizio, 442 U.S. at 186-187 . 8 Here, Silva's assertion that his rehabilitation merits a reduction in his sentence appears to be a plea for leniency based on factors other than those contemplated by section 2255.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Young v. Young
See, e.g., Heggy v Heggy, 944 F2d 1537, 1539 (CA 10, 1991), cert den 503 US 951 (1992); Kempf v Kempf, 868 F2d 970, 973 (CA 8, 1989); Pritchard v Pritchard, 732 F2d 372, 374 (CA 4, 1984); United States v Jones, 542 F2d 661, 673 (CA 6, 1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Graden James Miguel
The record fully satisfies Ramilo’s requirement that there be “some evidence”, that Miguel “may be able to pay restitution in the amount ordered in the future.” Ramilo, 986 F.2d at 336 ; see also United States v. Smith, 944 F.2d 618, 624 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 951 , 112 S.Ct. 1515 , 117 L.Ed.2d 651 (1992).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
California
v.
Cribas
v.
Cribas
No. 91-996.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 23, 1992.
Published
Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris without an affidavit of indigency executed by respondent granted. Certiorari denied.