Northbrook Prop. v. Acb Sales, 42 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 1994). · Go Syfert
Search
Northbrook Prop. v. Acb Sales, 42 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 1994). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“whether venue lies with a particular court is a question of law, which is reviewable on appeal de novo.”
59 citation events (19 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Charles Trois v. Apple Tree Auction Center, Inc, e (ca5, 2018-02-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Charles Trois v. Apple Tree Auction Center, Inc, e
5th Cir. · 2018 · signal: compare · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
whether venue lies with a particular court is a question of law, which is reviewable on appeal de novo.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Mitchell v. Perdido Trucking
S.D. Ala. · 2024 · confidence medium
Tex. May 7, 2013) (citing Tucker v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 42 F.3d 641, 641 (5th Cir. 1994)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Mitchell v. Perdido Trucking
S.D. Miss. · 2024 · confidence medium
Tex. May 7, 2013) (citing Tucker v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 42 F.3d 641, 641 (5th Cir. 1994)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Talbot's Pharmaceuticals Family Products L L C v. Skanda Group Industries L LC
W.D. La. · 2021 · confidence medium
Tucker v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 42 F.3d 641, *2 (5th Cir.1994) (unpubl.) (citation omitted).
cited Cited "see" Warshawsky v. City of Phoenix, Arizona
N.D. Tex. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Tucker v. U.S. Dept. of Army, 42 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 1994) (holding that venue in a Title VII case is based on each of these factors).
cited Cited "see" Thompson v. Travelers Indemnity Company
E.D. La. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Tucker v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 42 F.3d 641 , 1994 WL 708661, at *2 (5th Cir. 1994) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see" Allen v. United States Department of Homeland Security
5th Cir. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Tucker v. U.S. Dept. of Army, 42 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 1994); see also Pinson v. Rumsfeld, 192 Fed.Appx. 811, 817 (11th Cir.2006) ("The venue provisions of § 2000e-5(f)(3) were intended to be the exclusive venue provisions for Title VII employment discrimination actions and ... the more general provisions of § 1391 are not controlling in such cases.”). 4 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Northbrook Property
v.
Acb Sales
94-10413.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 1, 1994.
42 F.3d 641
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 58%
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (1)

42 F.3d 641

Northbrook Property
v.
ACB Sales*

NO. 94-10413

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Dec 01, 1994

Appeal From: N.D.Tex., No. 3:93-CV-674-R

1

DISMISSED.