green
Positive treatment
5.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 2004 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2004
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Jaworski v. Ernst & Young U.S. LLP
See Leodori v. CIGNA Corp., 175 N.J. 293, 303 , 814 A.2d 1098 , cert, denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 74 , 157 L.Ed.2d 250 (2003).
cited
Cited "see"
Paul Jaworski, Alexander Haggis and Robert Holewinski Vs.
See Leodori v. Cigna Corp., 175 N.J. 293, 303 , cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S. Ct. 74 , 157 L.
cited
Cited "see"
BARCO v. Tilton
See Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 586 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kimm v. BLISSET, LLC
See Leodori v. CIGNA Corp., 175 N.J. 293, 302 , 814 A. 2d 1098 , cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 74 , 157 L.Ed. 2d 250 (2003); Martindale v. Sandvik, *894 Inc., 173 N.J. 76, 84-85 , 800 A. 2d 872 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rodgers v. Finn
See Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 583 (9th Cir.2003) (“To be deemed adequate, the state law ground for decision must be well-established and consistently applied.”), cer t. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003).
cited
Cited "see"
Bennett v. Mueller
See Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003) (“Bennett").
cited
Cited "see"
Hernandez v. Schomig
See Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 580 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Reinert v. Gootkin
See also Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 580 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Coleman v. Allison
See, e.g., Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 581-83 (9th Cir.) (recognizing California’s untimeliness bar is represented by citations to In re Robbins and In re Clark), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ross v. Felker
Ford v. Georgia, 498 U.S. 411, 423-24 , 111 S.Ct. 850, 857 , 112 L.Ed.2d 935 (1991); King, 464 F.3d at 965 ; see also Townsend v. Knowles, 562 F.3d 1200, 1207 (9th Cir.2009) (“To be adequate, a state procedural rule must be ‘well-established and consistently applied.’ ” (quoting Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 583 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003)).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Pinnell v. Belleque
See also Bennett v. Mueller, 322 F.3d 573, 580 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 938 , 124 S.Ct. 105 , 157 L.Ed.2d 251 (2003).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Anderson, Warden
v.
Depew
v.
Depew
02-1723.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 6, 2003.
Published
C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.