Bruce Foxworthy v. Hiland Dairy Co., 993 F.2d 1551 (10th Cir. 1993). · Go Syfert
Bruce Foxworthy v. Hiland Dairy Co., 993 F.2d 1551 (10th Cir. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases · 2 courts · …effective caption is merely formal error and should never be viewed as fatal defect. ⚠ not in text
30 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Jewell v. Bestbus Co. (cadc, 2018-08-03)
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Jewell v. Bestbus Co.
D.C. Cir. · 2018 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
effective caption is merely formal error and should never be viewed as fatal defect.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Jewell v. Bestbus
D.D.C. · 2018 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
effective caption is merely formal error and should never be viewed as fatal defect.
cited Cited "see" Carrol Richard Olson v. Harold Coleman, Sheriff, and Paul Chris Nelson, County Attorney, Carrol Richard Olson v. Harold Coleman, Sheriff, and Alec Beth, County Correctional Administrator
10th Cir. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
Order and judgment vacated, mandate recalled and judgment reissued April 28, 1993; See 993 F.2d 1551 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bruce Foxworthy
v.
Hiland Dairy Company
92-6139.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
May 3, 1993.
993 F.2d 1551

993 F.2d 1551w

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

Bruce FOXWORTHY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
HILAND DAIRY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-6139.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

May 3, 1993.

NOTE: THE COURT HAS WITHDRAWN THIS OPINION