green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
7.1 score
G Cite
cited 5× by 3 distinct cases ·
"the filed rate doctrine applies whether the rate in question is approved by a federal or state agency"
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 23 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Amundson & Associates Art Studio, Ltd. v. National Council on Compensation Insurance
the rationale underlying the filed rate doctrine applies whether the rate in question is approved by a federal or state agency
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Destec Energy, Inc. v. Southern California Gas Co.
the filed rate doctrine applies whether the rate in question is approved by a federal or state agency
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Ruth Lopez v. City of Needles, Ca, a Municipal Corporation Leon Berger William Cetti Roy Mills Flora Hill Leroy Morgan
ajppellant is not required to amend in order to preserve his right to appeal. when one is granted leave to amend a pleading, she may elect to stand on her pleading and appeal, if the other requirements for a final, appealable judgment are satisfied.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Farrie v. Charles Town Races, Inc.
courts have read rule 12(f) to allow a district court to consider a motion to strike at any point in a case, reasoning that it is considering the matter of its own accord despite the fact that its attention was prompted by an untimely filed motion
cited
Cited "see"
Kmart Corp. v. Uniden America Corp. (In Re Kmart Corp.)
See Williams v. Jader Fuel Co., Inc., 944 F.2d 1388, 1399 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2306 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992); Stafford v. Connecticut Gen.
cited
Cited "see"
Steele v. City of Bemidji, Minn.
See, McCalden v. California Library Assoc., 955 F.2d 1214, 1223 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2306 , 119 L.Ed.2d 227 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Runnels v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.
See Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992) (extending rule of Lewis v. Faulkner to all pro se litigants).
discussed
Cited "see"
Coleman Vital v. Interfaith Medical Center and Local 1199
See 28 F.3d at 8-9 ; see also Grabois v. Jones, 89 F.3d 97 , 99 n. 3 (2d Cir.1996); accord Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir.) (requiring notice to pro se litigants that “include[s] both the text of Rule 56(e) and a short and plain statement in ordinary English that any factual assertion in the movant’s affidavits will be taken as true by the district court unless the non-movant contradicts the mov-ant with counter-affidavits or other documentary evidence”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Bailey v. PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND
See McCalden v. California Library Ass’n, 955 F.2d 1214 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2306 , 119 L.Ed.2d 227 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Miller v. Vesta, Inc.
See Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 287 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hershey v. Santa Clara Valley Humane Soc.
See McCalden v. California Library Ass'n, 955 F.2d 1214 , 1223 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 (1992) (section 1986 claim valid only if valid section 1985 claim exists); and Moor v. County of Alameda, 411 U.S. 693 , 703-04 & n. 17 (1980) (no independent cause of action under section 1988). 4 Hershey also raises for the first time on appeal that the district court erred by failing to recuse himself on grounds of bias.
discussed
Cited "see"
William Michael Neyland v. J.H. Crabtree, Warden S.B. Sales, Lieutenant, Sheridan, Or
See McCalden v. California Library Ass'n, 955 F.2d 1214 , 1224 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 (1992); cf. Serine v. Peterson, 989 F.2d 371, 372 (9th Cir.1993) (holding that plaintiff acknowledged order to be non-final by filing objections to that order). 5 Here, the February 15, 1995 order of dismissal was not a final order.
cited
Cited "see"
Banks v. Sheahan
See Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285-86 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992); Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir.1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9034, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 15,866 Martin Stivers Mary Chase Ernsberger Chamar, Inc. v. Richard Pierce George D. Wendell Denise Conrad Gary T. Robey Brian McKay Carol Widmer-Hanna Robert J. Rodefer Bill Bertram Individually and as Members of the Nevada State Private Investigators Licensing Board the Nevada State Private Investigators Licensing Board and Does 1-10
See McCalden v. California Library Ass'n, 955 F.2d 1214 , 1224 (9th Cir.1990) ("Adverse rulings alone are not sufficient to require recusal, even if the number of such rulings is extraordinarily high."), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2306 , 119 L.Ed.2d 227 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Stivers v. Pierce
See McCalden v. California Library Ass’n, 955 F.2d 1214, 1224 (9th Cir.1990) (“Adverse rulings alone are not sufficient to require recusal, even if the number of such rulings is extraordinarily high.”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2306 , 119 L.Ed.2d 227 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ralph Renna v. Allstate Insurance Company, Does 1-20
See McCalden v. California Library Ass'n, 955 F.2d 1214, 1219 (9th Cir. 1990) ("A party invoking the impossibility defense must show that he used reasonable efforts to surmount the obstacles which prevented performance.") (citing Oosten v. Hay Haulers Dairy Employees & Helpers Union, 45 Cal. 2d 784, 789 (1955)), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 (1992). 8 Nor did he establish that his situation involved more than "[m]ere difficulty, or unusual or unexpected expense." Glens Falls Indem.
cited
Cited "see"
St. Francis Regional Medical Center v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc.
See Arkansas Blue Cross and Blue Shield v. St Mary’s Hosp., Inc., 947 F.2d 1341, 1349-50 (8th Cir.1991), ce rt. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2305 , 119 L.Ed.2d 227 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Henderson v. Ayers
Moreover, pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by a lawyer, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 , 92 S.Ct, 594, 596 , 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972)(per curiam); Jackson v. Carey, 353 F.3d 750, 757 (9th Cir.2003), and “a complaint should not be dismissed if it states a claim under any legal theory, even if the plaintiff erroneously relies on a different legal theory.” Haddock v. Bd. of Dental Examiners of Cal., 777 F.2d 462, 464 (9th Cir.1985); see also McCalden v. Cal. Library Ass’n, 955 F.2d 1214 , 1223 (9th Cir.1990) (A plaintiff “is not required to state…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. City of Fairview Heights, Ill.
See also Williams v. Jader Fuel Co., 944 F.2d 1388, 1400 (7th Cir.1991)(“Motions to strike ‘are not favored.... ’ ”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2306 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McPherson v. Coombe
See also Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir.) (notice to pro se litigants “should include both the text of Rule 56(e) and a short and plain statement in ordinary English that any factual assertion in the movant’s affidavits will be taken as true by the district court unless the non-movant contradicts the movant with counter-affidavits or other documentary evidence”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mcpherson v. Coombe
See also Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir.) (notice to pro se litigants "should include both the text of Rule 56(e) and a short and plain statement in ordinary English that any factual assertion in the movant's affidavits will be taken as true by the district court unless the non-movant contradicts the movant with counter-affidavits or other documentary evidence"), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Lisek v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
See also Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 286 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Haywood Champion v. Christopher Artuz, Superintendent Sgt. v. Guarracino
Id. at 345 ; see also Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir.) (plain statement by moving party suffices), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 957 , 112 S.Ct. 2307 , 119 L.Ed.2d 228 (1992).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
St. Mary's Hospital, Inc.
v.
Arkansas Blue Cross & Blue Shield
v.
Arkansas Blue Cross & Blue Shield
No. 91-1631.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 1, 1992.
504 U.S. 957
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.