green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.4 score
“a new contention is not ... necessarily a new issue.”
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Haskell v. Goldman, Sachs & Co. (In Re Genesis Health Ventures, Inc.)
a new contention is not ... necessarily a new issue.
discussed
Cited "see"
Kaler v. Kana (In re Kana)
See Yamaha Corp. of Am. v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254 (D.C.Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 , reh’g denied, 507 U.S. 980 , 113 S.Ct. 1436 , 122 L.Ed.2d 802 (1993) (opining that the fact that evidence could have been presented on an issue in a prior suit, but was not, does not avoid the application of collateral estoppel); Akron Presform Mold Co. v. McNeil Corp., 496 F.2d 230, 235 (6th Cir.1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 997 , 95 S.Ct. 310 , 42 L.Ed.2d 270 (1974) (indicating that additional factual allegations not made in a prior suit did not permi…
discussed
Cited "see"
Reynaga v. Sun Studs, Inc.
See Yamaha Corp. of America v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254 (D.C.Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (“[0]nce an issue is raised and determined, it is the entire issue that is precluded, not just the particular arguments raised in support of it in the first case” (emphasis in original)).
cited
Cited "see"
Sierra Club v. Babbitt
See Yamaha Corp. of America v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254 (D.C.Cir.1992), ce rt. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Deitz v. Palaigos
See generally Yamaha Corp. of Am. v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 256 , (D.C.Cir.1992) (holding that issue preclusion extends to a matter that the court “must necessarily, albeit implicitly,” have decided), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ramallo v. Reno
See Yamaha Corp. of America v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254 (D.C.Cir.1992) (issue must be “actually and necessarily determined” to create collateral estoppel bar in subsequent litigation), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Fag Bearings Corporation
See, e.g., Yamaha Corp. of Am. v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254 (D.C.Cir.1992) (“[0]nce an issue is raised and determined, it' is the entire issue that is precluded, not just the particular arguments raised in support of it in the first case.”), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993); Sec.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
King v. Greenblatt
See also King, 52 F.3d 1 (1st Cir.1995), citing, Mackin v. City of Boston, 969 F.2d 1273, 1275 (1st Cir.1992) ("we believe that district courts should be flexible in considering requests for relaxation of, or release from, decrees which were initially established to bring about needed institutional reforms.”), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1043 , 122 L.Ed.2d 352 (1993). 41 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hickerson v. City of New York
Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 132.02(2)(d), at 132-26 (3d ed.1998); see, e.g., Yamaha Corp. v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254-55, 257 (D.C.Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dockets Nos. 98-7269, 98-7270
Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 132.02(2)(d), at 132-26 (3d ed.1998); see, e.g., Yamaha Corp. v. United States, 961 F.2d 245, 254-55, 257 (D.C.Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1078 , 113 S.Ct. 1044 , 122 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993)
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Davis
v.
Runyon, Postmaster General
v.
Runyon, Postmaster General
No. 92-6449.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 19, 1993.
506 U.S. 1078
Lead Opinion
C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until February 9, 1993, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition, in compliance with Rule 33 of the Rules of this Court.
Dissent
Justice Stevens,
dissenting.
For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), I would deny the petition for writ of certiorari without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.