Lohman v. Borough, 176 L. Ed. 2d 1222 (2010). · Go Syfert
Search
Lohman v. Borough, 176 L. Ed. 2d 1222 (2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
31 citation events (31 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Jerry Lee Baldwin v. The Board of Supervisors for the University of Louisiana System, The University of Louisiana at Lafayette, and Nelson Schexnayder, Individually and in his Capacity as Director of Athletics for the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (lactapp, 2020-02-21)
Treatment trajectory · 2010 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2010 2018 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jerry Lee Baldwin v. The Board of Supervisors for the University of Louisiana System, The University of Louisiana at Lafayette, and Nelson Schexnayder, Individually and in his Capacity as Director of Athletics for the University of Louisiana at Lafayette
La. Ct. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
Mary' s Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 Cir. 6/ 30/ 09), 2009 WL 1879476 ( unpublished), writs denied, 2009- 1917, 2009- 1919 ( La. 12/ 18/ 09), 23 So. 3d 947, 948 , cert. denied, 560 U. S. 926 , 130 S. Ct. 3330 , 176 L.Ed. 2d 1222 2010).
examined Cited "see" Baldwin v. Board of Supervisors for University of Louisiana System (3×)
La. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Baldwin v. Board of Supervisors for University of Louisiana System, 08-2359, pp. 22-23 (La.App. 1st Cir.6/30/09), 11 So.3d 1247 (unpublished opinion), writs denied, 09-1917 (La.12/18/09), 23 So.3d 947 , and 09-1919 (La.12/18/09), 23 So.3d 948 , cert. denied, 560 U.S. 926 , 130 S.Ct. 3330 , 176 L.Ed.2d 1222 (2010).
discussed Cited "see" YSI Ventures, LLC v. City of Boston Zoning Board of Appeals
Mass. Super. Ct. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dickey v. Warren, 75Mass.App.Ct. 585, 590, rev. den., 455 Mass. 1107 (2009), cert, den., 560 U.S. 926 (2010) (complaints to City of Boston inspectional services department during condemnation hearing constitute petitioning activity under §59H); Donovan v. Gardner, 50 Mass.App.Ct. 595, 599 (2000) (appeals to zoning board, conservation commission, fire department, and other local and state regulatoiy bodies constitute petitioning activity).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Macris v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.
W.D.N.Y. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
It requires a debt collector to provide written notice, referred to as a ‘notice of debt’ or a ‘validation notice,’ within five days after its initial communication with a consumer, indicating the amount of the alleged debt as well as the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692g(a)(1)-(2); see also Ellis v. Solomon & Solomon, P.C., 591 F.3d 130, 134 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 560 U.S. 926 , 130 S.Ct. 3333 , 176 L.Ed.2d 1223 (2010).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Rajkumar v. FBCS, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
However, “[e]ven in ‘crafting a norm that protects the naive and the credulous,’” courts “have ‘carefully preserved the concept of reasonableness.’” Id. (quoting Clomon, 988 F.2d at 1319 ); see also Ellis v. Solomon & Solomon, P.C., 591 F.3d 130, 135 (2d Cir. 2010) (the least sophisticated consumer is “neither irrational nor a dolt”), cert. denied, 560 U.S. 926 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Kurzdorfer v. Constar Financial Services, LLC
W.D.N.Y. · 2020 · signal: see also · confidence low
It requires a debt collector to provide written notice, referred to as a “notice of debt” or a “validation notice,” within five days after its initial communication with a consumer, indicating the amount of the alleged debt as well as the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692g(a)(1)-(2); see also Ellis v. Solomon & Solomon, P.C., 591 F.3d 130, 134 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 560 U.S. 926 (2010).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Nicholas Lohman
v.
Duryea Borough
No. 09-1147.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 24, 2010.
176 L. Ed. 2d 1222
Published

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 574 F.3d 163.