Williams v. Lynn, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir. 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
Williams v. Lynn, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
57 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Green v. Green (In Re Green) (lawb, 2005-09-30) · Strongest negative: United States v. Banks (nysd, 2001-06-26)
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" United States v. Banks
S.D.N.Y. · 2001 · signal: but see · confidence high
LEXIS 5516, at *4-7 (E.D.Ill.1995), aff'd, 76 F.3d 146 (7th Cir.1996) (holding that search revealing trap was a valid inventory search); but see United States v. Thomas, 787 F.Supp. 663, 688 (E.D.Tex.1992), aff'd, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir.1993) (exploration of trap door mechanism in defendant’s car was conducted for investigatory rather than inventory reasons, and was thus not a valid inventory search).
cited Cited "see" Green v. Green (In Re Green)
Bankr. W.D. La. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Roy v. Gravel, 143 B.R. 825, 828 (W.D.La.1992), aff'd, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir.1993).
cited Cited "see" Office of Thrift Supervision v. Felt (Felt)
5th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Roy v. Gravel, 143 B.R. 825, 828 (W.D.La.1992), aff'd, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir.1993).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Cottonport Bank v. Dichiara
W.D. La. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence low
“When a finding of fact is premised on an improper legal standard, or a proper one improperly applied, that finding loses the insulation of the clearly erroneous rule.’ ” In re Niland, 825 F.2d 801, 806 (5th Cir.1987) (quoting Wilson v. Huffman, 818 F.2d 1135 , 1142 (5th Cir.1987)); see also Roy v. Gravel, 143 B.R. 825, 827 (W.D.La.1992), aff'd 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 961 , 113 S.Ct. 2931 , 124 L.Ed.2d 681 (1993).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Beard v. U.S. Trustee
W.D. La. · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
“A finding of fact is clearly erroneous ‘when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’ ... ‘When a finding of fact is premised on an improper legal standard, or a proper one improperly applied, that finding loses the insulation of the clearly erroneous rule.’ ” In re Niland, 825 F.2d 801, 806 (5th Cir.1987) (quoting Wilson v. Huffman, 818 F.2d 1135 , 1142 (5th Cir.1987)); see also Roy v. Gravel, 143 B.R. 825 (W.D.La.1992), aff’d 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir.1993…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Delaney v. Corley
W.D. La. · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
When a finding of fact is premised on an improper legal standard, or a proper one improperly applied, that finding loses the insulation of the clearly erroneous rule.” In re Niland, 825 F.2d 801, 806 (5th Cir.1987); see also Roy v. Gravel, 143 B.R. 825 (W.D.La.1992), aff'd, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir.1993).
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Marlar
N.D. Miss. · 1993 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also United States v. Thomas, 787 F.Supp. 663, 684 (E.D.Tex.1992) (dog merely amplifies human olfactory capacity which is not search), affd, 983 F.2d 1062 (1993).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Williams
v.
Lynn
92-3526.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jan 20, 1993.
983 F.2d 1062
Published

983 F.2d 1062

Williams
v.
Lynn[**]

NO. 92-3526

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Jan 20, 1993

1

Appeal From: M.D.La.

2

AFFIRMED.

**

Conference Calendar