Larson (Shirley), Mathews (Francis B.) v. Larson (Frederick G.), 892 F.2d 1046 (9th Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Larson (Shirley), Mathews (Francis B.) v. Larson (Frederick G.), 892 F.2d 1046 (9th Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“plaintiff now cannot amend her complaint because the case is 13 closed after final judgment and there are no active pleadings to amend.”
45 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Johnson v. Carey (wawd, 2025-06-13)
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Johnson v. Carey (2×) also: Cited "see"
W.D. Wash. · 2025 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
plaintiff now cannot amend her complaint because the case is 13 closed after final judgment and there are no active pleadings to amend.
discussed Cited "see" Hicks v. Dotson
E.D. Wash. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Peace v. Caldwell, 892 F.2d 1046 (9th Cir.1990) (unpublished) (prison has a legitimate pe-nological interest in preventing inmates from hoarding medications); Todd v. Bigelow, 497 Fed.Appx. 839, 841-42 (10th Cir.2012) (prevention of drug abuse); Chavers v. Wash. State Penitentiary, 2013 WL 6086149 (E.D.Wash.2013) (legitimate peno-logical goal of limiting the use of restricted drugs where not medically necessary), affld in relevant part, 585 Fed.Appx. 360 (9th Cir.2014).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Cargocaire Engineering Corp. v. Dwyer (In Re Gemel International, Inc.)
Bankr. D. Mass. · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also United Bank of Arizona v. United States (In re Stewart-Smith Construction), 892 F.2d 1046 (9th Cir.1989); In re Three Partners, Inc., 1995 WL 584519 at * 6 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Weiss v. People Savings Bank (In Re Three Partners, Inc.)
D. Mass. · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Freightliner Market Development Corp. v. Silver Wheel Freightlines, Inc., 823 F.2d 362, 368 (9th Cir.1987) (“The purposes underlying § 362(c)(2) & (4) require that a debtor seek affirmative express consent from all parties involved before using cash collateral_ [Ijmplied consent [is] insufficient to satisfy the requirements of § 362(c)(2).”); see also United Bank of Arizona v. United States (In re Stewart-Smith Construction), 892 F.2d 1046 (9th Cir.1989). 9 The Debtor’s failure to obtain the express consent of the IRS for the use of cash collateral violated § 363(e)(2)(A).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Larson (Shirley), Mathews (Francis B.)
v.
Larson (Frederick G.)
88-2816_1.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Dec 15, 1989.
892 F.2d 1046
Cited by 40 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 77%
Citer courts: W.D. Washington (1)

892 F.2d 1046

Larson (Shirley), Mathews (Francis B.)
v.
Larson (Frederick G.)

NO. 88-2816

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

DEC 15, 1989

1

Appeal From: N.D.Cal.

2

AFFIRMED.