green
Positive treatment
5.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Barrett v. McDonald Investments, Inc.
(2×)
See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 279 F.3d 889, 892-95 (9th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2329 , 153 L.Ed.2d 160 (2002); Irwin, 324 F.Supp.2d at 1108. [¶ 36] Substantive unconscionability or unfairness “ ‘focuses on the terms of the agreement and whether those terms are so one-sided as to shock the conscience.’ ” Ferguson, 298 F.3d at 784 (quoting Kinney v. United Healthcare Sens., Inc., 70 Cal.App.4th 1322, 1330 , 83 Cal.Rptr.2d 348 (Cal.Ct.App.1999)); see also Al-Safin, 394 F.3d at 1261 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Wydler v. Bank of America, N.A.
See Hoffend v. Villa, 261 F.3d 1148 , 1150 (11th Cir.2001) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2328 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002). “[U]nless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief,” the complaint should not he dismissed on grounds that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
discussed
Cited "see"
Minnesota Ex Rel. Hatch v. Hoeven
Thus, the injunction DM & E seeks is within the traditional purview of Ex parte Young because it seeks “to bring the State’s regulatory scheme into compliance with federal law.” Coeur d’Alene Tribe, 521 U.S. at 289 , 117 S.Ct. 2028 , 138 L.Ed.2d 438 (O’Connor, J., concurring); see Duke Energy Trading & Mktg., L.L.C. v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1053-54 (9th Cir.2001), ce rt. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2327 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.
See Hoffend v. Villa, 261 F.3d 1148 , 1150 (11th Cir.2001) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2328 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002). “[Ujnless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief,” the complaint should not be dismissed on grounds that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
cited
Cited "see"
Thinket Ink Information Resources, Inc. v. Sun Microsystems, Inc.
See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 279 F.3d 889 , 892 n. 2 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2329 , 153 L.Ed.2d 160 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
DAKOTA, MINNESOTA & EASTERN RAILROAD CORPORATION, — APPELLEE/CROSS v. STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, — APPELLANTS/CROSS
Thus, the injunction DM & E seeks is within the traditional purview of Ex parte Young because it seeks “to bring the State’s regulatory scheme into compliance with federal law.” Coeur d’Alene Tribe, 521 U.S. at 289 , 117 S.Ct. 2028 (O’Connor, J., concurring); see Duke Energy Trading & Mktg., L.L.C. v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1053-54 (9th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2327 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dakota, MN & Eastern v. State of SD
Thus, the injunction DM&E seeks is within the traditional purview of Ex parte Young because it seeks “to bring the State’s regulatory scheme into compliance with federal law.” Coeur d’Alene Tribe, 521 U.S. at 289 (O’Connor, J., concurring); see Duke Energy Trading & Mktg., L.L.C. v. Davis, 267 F.3d 1042, 1053-54 (9th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Levine v. BellSouth Corp.
See Hoffend v. Villa, 261 F.3d 1148 , 1150 (11th Cir.2001) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2328 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002). “[U]nless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief,” the complaint should not be dismissed on grounds that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
discussed
Cited "see"
Druskin v. Answerthink, Inc.
See In re Villa, 261 F.3d 1148 , 1150 (11th Cir.2001) (citation omitted), ce rt. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2328 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002). “[Ujnless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief,” the complaint should not be dismissed on grounds that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
cited
Cited "see"
Domingo v. Ameriquest Mortgage Co.
See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 279 F.3d 889, 892-93 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2329 , 153 L.Ed.2d 160 (2002). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Agribank, FCB v. Gordon (In Re Gordon)
See Equitable Bank v. Miller (In re Miller), 39 F.3d 301, 305 (11th Cir.1994) (totality of circumstances, recklessness of behavior, reckless disregard for truth, and sheer magnitude of misrepresentation are factors to consider regarding intent to deceive). 14 . 261 F.3d 1148 (11th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2328 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002). 15 . 39 F.3d 301 (11th Cir.1994). 16 . 26 B.R. 305 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1982). 17 . 98 B.R. 423 (Bankr.C.D.Ill.1989). 18 . 726 F.2d 452 (8th Cir.1984). 19 . 197 B.R. 949 (Bankr.M.D.Ga.1996) (Walker, J.). 20 . 277 B.R. 805 (Bankr.M.D.Ga.2001) …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Davis v. Melcher (In Re Melcher)
See also Hoffend v. Villa (In re Villa), 261 F.3d 1148 (11th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2328 , 153 L.Ed.2d 159 (2002) (viewing Strang as having imputed liability for fraud under the predecessor to § 523(a)(2)(A) based on the common law of partnership and agency) (dicta); Lawrence Poneroff, Vicarious Thrills: The Case for Application of Agency Rules in Bankruptcy Dischargeability Litigation, 70 Tul.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, U.S., L.L.C. v. John Nackel
It also appears well established under California law that “courts may refuse to enforce an unconscionable arbitration agreement.” Ingle v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 328 F.3d 1165, 1170 (9th Cir.2003); see also Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 279 F.3d 889, 893-94 (9th Cir.) (same), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1112 , 122 S.Ct. 2329 , 153 L.Ed.2d 160 (2002).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Clanton
v.
Greenwood Trust Co
v.
Greenwood Trust Co
01-1457.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 3, 2002.
Published
CLANTON
v.
GREENWOOD TRUST CO.
No. 01-1457.
Supreme Court of the United States.
June 3, 2002.
1
Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.