green
Positive treatment
5.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Durham Manufacturing Co. v. Merriam Manufacturing Co.
“If a gap exists in the statute of limitations for CERCLA actions under § 113(f)(1), it is one to be resolved by Congress.” Id.; see also Reichhold Chemicals, Inc. v. Textron, Inc., 888 F.Supp. 1116, 1125 (N.D.Fla.1995) (refusing to borrow another statute of limitations where no triggering event under § 113(g)(3) had occurred or was likely to occur); Gould Inc. v. A & M Battery and Tire Service, 901 F.Supp. 906, 914 (M.D.Pa.1995) (holding that plaintiffs entering into a consent agreement with the EPA did not trigger the running of the statute of limitations under § 113(g)(3) for purpose…
discussed
Cited "see"
Solutia, Inc. v. McWane, Inc.
See United Technologies Corp. v. Browning-Ferris Indus., 33 F.3d 96, 99-100 (1st Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1176 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1128 (1995); Akzo Coatings, Inc. v. Aigner Corp., 30 F.3d 761, 764 (7th Cir. 1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Jason Wayne Gregory v. Commonwealth of Virginia
See Siripongs v. Calderon, 35 F.3d 1308, 1321 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 (1995); United States v. Martinez-Gallegos, 807 F.2d 868, 870 (9th Cir. 1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Longoria
Accordingly, Mr. Longoria had no reasonable expectation that his conversations would not be “subject to interception” by his accomplices. 3 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (2); see Siripongs v. Calderon, 35 F.3d 1308, 1320 (9th Cir.1994) (concluding defendant had no expectation of privacy in conversations conducted in Thai in the presence of a police officer), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1175 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1127 (1995); In re Matter of John Doe Trader, 894 F.2d at 243-44 (holding defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in conversations conducted on trading floor in presence of gove…
cited
Cited "see"
OHM Remediation Services v. Evans Cooperage Co.
See United Technologies Corp. v. BFI, Inc., 33 F.3d 96, 98 (1st Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1176 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1128 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
OHM Remediation Services v. Evans Cooperage Co., Inc.
See United Technologies Corp. v. BFI, Inc., 33 F.3d 96, 98 (1st Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1176 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1128 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alberto Gamez-Granillo
See Siripongs v. Calderon, 35 F.3d 1308, 1313-14 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1175 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1127 (1995). 6 Gamez-Granillo claims his counsel should have sought different application of the Sentencing Guidelines.
discussed
Cited "see"
Redwing Carriers, Inc. v. Saraland Apartments
(2×)
See United Technologies Corp. v. Browning-Ferris Indus., 33 F.3d 96, 99-100 (1st Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1176 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1128 (1995); Akzo Coatings, Inc. v. Aigner Corp., 30 F.3d 761, 764 (7th Cir.1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Skaggs v. Parker
See Ross v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 81, 88 , 108 S.Ct. 2273 , 101 L.Ed.2d 80 (1988) (“So long as the jury that sits is impartial, the fact that the defendant had to use the peremptory challenge to achieve that result does not mean that the Sixth Amendment was violated.”); see also Siripongs v. Calderon, 35 F.3d 1308, 1322 (9th Cir.1994) (finding it immaterial that the habeas petitioner “may have been required' to use preemptory challenges to excuse jurors that the trial court would have excused for cause had it employed the proper standard”), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1183 , 115 S.Ct. 1175 , 1…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Sheek
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 94-7756.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 21, 1995.
Published
C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.