green
Positive treatment
4.3 score
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Aron Rosenberg v. Xm Ventures, a Maryland Trust and Motient Corporation, a Delaware Corporation
See United States v. State of Alaska, 521 U.S. 1 , 117 S.Ct. 1888 , 138 L.Ed.2d 231 (1997), reh’g denied, 521 U.S. 1144 , 118 S.Ct. 19 , 138 L.Ed.2d 1051 (1997); United Food & *142 Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544, 550 , 116 S.Ct. 1529 , 134 L.Ed.2d 758 (1996) (reading which gives effect to all of a statute’s provisions prevails over one which disregards a provision as legislative oversight); First Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. FDIC, 79 F.3d 362, 367 (3d Cir.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rosenberg v. XM Ventures
See 5 United States v. State of Alaska, 521 U.S. 1 (1997), reh'g denied, 521 U.S. 1144 (1997); United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544, 550 (1996) (reading which gives effect to all of a statute's provisions prevails over one which disregards a provision as legislative oversight); First Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. FDIC, 79 F.3d 362, 367 (3d Cir. 1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Carrillo
See Alvarado-Torres, 45 F.Supp.2d at 994 (citing Murphy v. Netherland, 116 F.3d 97, 100 (4th Cir.), cert. denied 521 U.S. 1144 , 118 S.Ct. 26 , 138 L.Ed.2d 1050 (1997); Waldron v. I.N.S., 17 F.3d 511, 518 (2nd Cir.1993); Esparza-Ponce, 7 F.Supp.2d at 1097 ); see also Rodrigues, at 184-185; Chaparro-Alcantara, 37 F.Supp.2d at 1125 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alvarado-Torres
See Murphy v. Netherland, 116 F.3d 97, 100 (4th Cir.) (emphasizing that while the Convention might create individual rights, “it certainly does not create constitutional rights”) (emphasis in original), cert. denied, 521 U.S. 1144 , 118 S.Ct. 26 , 138 L.Ed.2d 1050 (1997); Waldron v. I.N.S., 17 F.3d 511, 518 (2d Cir.1993) (finding that the right to communicate with consular officials, enumerated in the Convention, did not create any fundamental Constitutional right); United States v. Esparza-Ponce, 7 F.Supp.2d 1084, 1097 (S.D.Cal.1998) (holding that a violation of the Convention does not ri…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Flores v. State
(2×)
Id.; see also, Murphy v. Netherland, 116 F.3d 97, 100 (C.A.4),cert. denied, 521 U.S. 1144 , 118 S.Ct. 26 , 138 L.Ed.2d 1050 (1997); Waldron v. I.N.S., 17 F.3d 511, 518 (C.A.2, 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1014 , 115 S.Ct. 572 , 130 L.Ed.2d 489 (1994)(holding that rights under Vienna Convention are not the equivalent of fundamental rights, such as the right to counsel). ¶ 18 In order to gain relief from a violation of a statutory right an appellant must show a violation.
United States
v.
Alaska Hemphill v. Housing Authority of the City of Charleston Smith v. California Fair Employment and Housing Commission Abbey v. Sverdrup Corp. Christy v. Magnuson Scott v. Nachman Carter v. Amtrak National Railroad Passenger Corporation Maxwell v. Texas Perez v. United States Veatch v. United States Vasquez v. Office of Personnel Management Taplin v. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division Gangi v. Baybank, FSB Sidles v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona Siddiqui v. New York Howard v. Caspari, Superintendent, Missouri Eastern Correctional Center In re Rodriguez, Hart v. California Bergne v. United States District Court for the Central District of California Causey v. United States Oberuch v. Arizona Lewis v. Supreme Court of California McBroom v. Franklin County Board of Elections Grant v. In Rem Release Board Loyer v. Loyer (two judgments) Barbary v. Sturm In re Carney, Smith v. Biller Elder v. Merit Systems Protection Board Toney v. United States Short v. United States Bundy v. United States Burns v. United States Schwarz v. Merit Systems Protection Board Banks v. United States Bannister v. Bowersox, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center Collins v. Farmers Home Administration Tinsley v. United States
v.
Alaska Hemphill v. Housing Authority of the City of Charleston Smith v. California Fair Employment and Housing Commission Abbey v. Sverdrup Corp. Christy v. Magnuson Scott v. Nachman Carter v. Amtrak National Railroad Passenger Corporation Maxwell v. Texas Perez v. United States Veatch v. United States Vasquez v. Office of Personnel Management Taplin v. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division Gangi v. Baybank, FSB Sidles v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona Siddiqui v. New York Howard v. Caspari, Superintendent, Missouri Eastern Correctional Center In re Rodriguez, Hart v. California Bergne v. United States District Court for the Central District of California Causey v. United States Oberuch v. Arizona Lewis v. Supreme Court of California McBroom v. Franklin County Board of Elections Grant v. In Rem Release Board Loyer v. Loyer (two judgments) Barbary v. Sturm In re Carney, Smith v. Biller Elder v. Merit Systems Protection Board Toney v. United States Short v. United States Bundy v. United States Burns v. United States Schwarz v. Merit Systems Protection Board Banks v. United States Bannister v. Bowersox, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center Collins v. Farmers Home Administration Tinsley v. United States
No. 84, Orig; No. 94-9498; No. 96-31; No. 96-1903; No. 96-5609; No. 96-7326; No. 96-7703; No. 96-7878; No. 96-7929; No. 96-7957; No. 96-8405; No. 96-8483; No. 96-8491; No. 96-8534; No. 96-8535; No. 96-8590; No. 96-8639; No. 96-8668; No. 96-8681; No. 96-8686; No. 96-8699; No. 96-8722; No. 96-8761; No. 96-8803; No. 96-8817; No. 96-8939; No. 96-8947; No. 96-9014; No. 96-9038; No. 96-9046; No. 96-9071; No. 96-9073; No. 96-9079; No. 96-9094; No. 96-9115; No. 96-9137; No. 96-9175; No. 96-9237.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Sep 12, 1997.
521 U.S. 1144
Published
Opinion text not yet available. Try Google Scholar