green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
9.1 score
“a judicial construction of a statute is an authoritative statement of what the statute meant before as well as after the decision of the case giving rise to that construction.”
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 30 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Schwartz v. State.
a judicial construction of a statute is an authoritative statement of what the statute meant before as well as after the decision of the case giving rise to that construction.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
McPherson v. State
in kansas, the district court retains jurisdiction until an appeal is docketed with the appellate court.
cited
Cited "see"
Roberts v. The SAGE Corporation
See Patterson, 375 F.3d at 220 (quoting Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S. Ct. 1612 , 128 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Cotz v. Mastroeni
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 52 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Strauss v. New York State Department of Education
Passenger Corp. v Morgan, 536 US 101, 117 [2002]; see Lambert v Genesee Hosp., 10 F3d 46 , 53 [2d Cir 1993], cert denied 511 US 1052 [1994]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shobinder Gill v. Immigration and Naturalization Services
(2×)
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 56 (2d Cir.1993) ("[W]e have discretion to consider and decide sua sponte a dispositive issue of law."), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); see also Thomas v. Crosby, 371 F.3d 782, 793 (11th Cir.2004) (Tjoflat, J., concurring) ("It is beyond dispute that, in general, we have the power to consider issues that a party fails to raise on appeal, even though the petitioner does not have the right to demand such consideration."); United States v. Boyd, 208 F.3d 638, 652 (7th Cir.2000) (finding an inter-circuit consensus t…
cited
Cited "see"
Boxill v. Brooklyn College
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Griswold v. Morgan
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993) (“multiple incidents of discrimination, even similar ones, that are not the result of a discriminatory policy or mechanism do not amount to a continuing violation”), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 *232 S.Ct. 1612, 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Creason v. Seaboard Corp.
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 55 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); Cobb v. Anheuser Busch, Inc., 793 F.Supp. 1457, 1490 (E.D.Mo.1990).
cited
Cited "see"
Kent v. General Motors Regional Personnel Center-East Region
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46, 53 (2d Cir.1993) (citing cases), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Provost v. City of Newburgh
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 54 (2d Cir.1993) (“[T]he specificity requirement is obligatory.”), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Provost v. The City Of Newburgh
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 54 (2d Cir. 1993) ("[T]he specificity requirement is obligatory."), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Vernon v. PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JER.
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); see also Van Zant v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 80 F.3d 708, 713 (2d Cir.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Carter v. New York City Department of Corrections
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993) ("The continuing violation exception applies to cases involving specific discriminatory policies or mechanisms such as discriminatory seniority lists, or discriminatory employment tests .... multiple incidents of discrimination, even similar ones, that are not the result of a discriminatory policy or mechanism do not amount to a continuing violation.”), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994). .
cited
Cited "see"
Stephen M. Kelly v. City of Oakland, a Municipal Corporation Kent McNab Richard Wirkkala, and Antonio Romero Douglas Anderson Joseph Samuels, Jr., Stephen M. Kelly v. City of Oakland, a Municipal Corporation Kent McNab Richard Wirkkala
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp. , 10 F.3d 46 (2d Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Kelly v. City of Oakland
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Marks v. New York University
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); Acha v. Beame, 570 F.2d 57 , 65 (2d Cir.1978); Ahmed v. Samson Management Corp., 96 Civ. 9530(MBM), 1996 WL 183011 , at *4 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed
Cited "see"
Dollinger v. State Insurance Fund
See Quinn v. Green Tree Credit Corp., 159 F.3d 759, 765 (2d Cir.1998) (citing Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 52 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); Cornwell v. Robinson, 23 F.3d 694, 704 (2d Cir.1994)); Lloyd v. WABC-TV, 879 F.Supp. 394, 399 (S.D.N.Y.1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Zerilli v. New York City Transit Authority
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); Humphrey v. Council of Jewish Feds., 901 F.Supp. 703, 708 (S.D.N.Y.1995).
cited
Cited "see"
Petrosky v. New York State Department of Motor Vehicles
See Lambert v. Genesee Hospital, 10 F.3d 46, 53 (2d Cir. *78 1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 , (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lavalley v. E.B. & A.C. Whiting Co.
(2×)
See Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 58 (2d Cir. 1993) (no finding of disparate treatment where plaintiffs failed to offer any evidence that employer “departed from [leave of absence] policy in a discriminatory manner, or that the policy itself was designed to discriminate against pregnant women”), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 (1994).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Gao v. Graceful Services, Inc.
See, e.g., Lambert v. Genesee Hospital, 10 F.3d 46, 53 (2d Cir .1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Estate of D.B. ex rel. Briggs v. Thousand Islands Cent. Sch. Dist.
“If a continuing violation is shown, a plaintiff is entitled to have a court consider all relevant actions allegedly taken pursuant to the employer’s discriminatory policy or practice, including those that would otherwise be time barred.” Van Zant v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 80 F.3d 708, 713 (2d Cir.1996); see, e.g., Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993) (“Under the continuing violation exception to the Title VII limitations period, if a Title VII plaintiff files an EEO[ ] charge that is timely as to any incident of discrimination in furtherance of án ongoing policy…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nyenhuis v. Metropolitan District Commission
The continuing violation doctrine “renders timely claims based on otherwise stale acts only if (1) the acts within and without the limitations period are sufficiently similar and frequent to justify a conclusion that both are part of a single discriminatory employment practice chargeable to the employer, and (2) the circumstances are such that a reasonable person in the plaintiffs position would not have sued earlier.” Morris v. Amalgamated Lithographers of America, Local One, 994 F.Supp. 161, 164 (S.D.N.Y.1998)(internal quotation omitted); see also Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 5…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bliss v. Rochester City School District
To invoke the doctrine, a plaintiff must show either (1) “specific ongoing discriminatory policies or practices,” or (2) “specific and related instances of discrimination [that] are permitted by the employer to continue unremedied for so long as to amount to a discriminatory policy or practice.” Quinn v. Green Tree Credit Corp., 159 F.3d 759, 766 (2d Cir.1998) (quoting Cornwell v. Robinson, 23 F.3d 694, 704 (2d Cir.1994)); see also Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.1993) (“[Multiple incidents of discrimination, even similar ones, that are not the result of a discrimin…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Seils v. Rochester City School District
The “continuing violation exception” to the general 300 day limitation provides that if a plaintiff “files a timely EEOC charge about a particular discriminatory act committed in furtherance of an ongoing policy of discrimination,” the statute of limitations is extended “for all claims of discriminatory acts committed under that policy.” Lightfoot v. Union Carbide Corp., 110 F.3d 898, 907 (2d Cir.1997); see Harris v. City of New York, 186 F.3d 243, 248-50 (2d Cir.1999). *113 To invoke the doctrine, a plaintiff must show either (1) “specific ongoing discriminatory policies or prac…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hill v. Taconic Developmental Disabilities Services Office
See, e.g., Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 , 53 (2d Cir.), cert. denied , 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lisa L. Fitzgerald v. William Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service
(2×)
"If a continuing violation is shown, a plaintiff is entitled to have a court consider all relevant actions allegedly taken pursuant to the employer's discriminatory policy or practice, including those that would otherwise be time barred." Van Zant v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 80 F.3d 708, 713 (2d Cir. 1996); see, e.g., Lambert v. Genesee Hospital, 10 F.3d 46, 53 (2d Cir. 1993) ("Under the continuing violation exception to the Title VII limitations period, if a Title VII plaintiff files an EEO[] charge that is timely as to any incident of discrimination in furtherance of an ongoing policy of di…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Muszak v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Sept.27, 1996); see also Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46 (2d Cir.1993) (holding, inter alia, that plaintiffs, who failed to produce evidence that they met qualifications set forth in employer’s job description, could not maintain a claim that they had been passed over for promotion in violation of Title VII), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1052 , 114 S.Ct. 1612 , 128 L.Ed.2d 339 (1994); accord Canino v. EEOC, 707 F.2d 468 , 471 (11th Cir.1983) (holding that plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory failure to promote where plaintiff did not meet qualifications of posit…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Weems v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Co., Inc.
(2×)
On the contrary, the correct rule, briefly stated, is that "[t]his Court may rely on a decision of any federal court, but it is bound by the decisions of the United States Supreme Court." Gurganus, 603 So.2d at 908 (Shores, J., concurring specially) (emphasis in original); see also Amerada Hess Corp. v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp., 627 So.2d 367 , 373 n. 1 (Ala.1993), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 114 S.Ct. 1610 , 128 L.Ed.2d 338 (1994).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Branton
v.
Federal Communications Commission
v.
Federal Communications Commission
No. 93-1047.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 25, 1994.
Published
Citer courts: Hawaii Supreme Court (1) · Court of Appeals of Kansas (1)
C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.