Michelfelder v. Thomas Jefferson Univ., 529 U.S. 1095 (2000). · Go Syfert
Michelfelder v. Thomas Jefferson Univ., 529 U.S. 1095 (2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Harmonia Holdings Group, LLC v. United States (uscfc, 2020-04-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Harmonia Holdings Group, LLC v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2020 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, e.g., McKart v. United States, 395 U.S. at 197 (“We cannot agree that application of the exhaustion doctrine would be proper in the circumstances of the present case.”). “‘[A]dministrative remedies need not be pursued if the litigant's interests in immediate judicial review outweigh the government's interests in the efficiency or administrative autonomy that the exhaustion doctrine is designed to further.’” McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. at 146 (quoting West v. Bergland, 611 F.2d 710, 715 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 821 (1980)); see also Shalala v. Illinois Council o…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Jones v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2015 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, e.g., McKart v. United States, 395 U.S. at 197 , 89 S.Ct. 1657 (“We cannot agree that application of the exhaustion doctrine would be proper in the circumstances of the present case.”). “ ‘[Administrative remedies need not be pursued if the litigant’s interests in immediate judicial review outweigh the government’s interests in the efficiency or administrative autonomy that the exhaustion doctrine is designed to further.’ ” McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. at 146 , 112 S.Ct. 1081 (quoting West v. Bergland, 611 F.2d 710, 715 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 821 , 101 S.C…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Crowley v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
However, ‘“administrative remedies need not be pursued if the litigant’s interests in immediate judicial review outweigh the government’s interests in the efficiency or administrative autonomy that the exhaustion doctrine is designed to further.’ ” McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. at 146 , 112 S.Ct. 1081 (quoting West v. Bergland, 611 F.2d 710, 715 (8th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 821 , 101 S.Ct. 79 , 66 L.Ed.2d 23 (1980)); see also Shalala v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care, Inc., 529 U.S. 1,13 , 120 S.Ct. 1084 , 146 L.Ed.2d 1 , reh’g denied, 529 U.S. 1095 , 120 S.Ct. 1738…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Michelfelder
v.
Thomas Jefferson University White et ux. v. Security Pacific Financial Services, Inc. Luna v. County of San Bernardino Clanton v. Township of Redford Chappell, in Interest of A. M. K. v. Meese Cowhig v. Caldera, Secretary of the Army Smith v. Moore, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections Beckham v. Cain, Warden Silo v. Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services Coombs v. Pennsylvania Calhoun v. DeTella, Warden Abbey v. Robert Bosch GmbH
No. 99-1004; No. 99-1104; No. 99-1121; No. 99-1130; No. 99-1135; No. 99-1322; No. 99-5279; No. 99-7307; No. 99-7329; No. 99-7700; No. 99-7737; No. 99-7754.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 24, 2000.
529 U.S. 1095
Published

Opinion text not yet available. Try Google Scholar