United States v. O'Kaine, 86 F.3d 1168 (11th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. O'Kaine, 86 F.3d 1168 (11th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“in order to prove civil theft, it is necessary to show not only that the defendant obtained or endeavored to obtain plaintiff's property, but that he did so with the felonious intent to commit a crime.”
37 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 13 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Iglesias De Castro v. Castro (mnd, 2018-11-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Iglesias De Castro v. Castro
D. Minnesota · 2018 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
in order to prove civil theft, it is necessary to show not only that the defendant obtained or endeavored to obtain plaintiff's property, but that he did so with the felonious intent to commit a crime.
cited Cited "see" Powell v. Carey International, Inc.
S.D. Fla. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kuchinskas v. Broward County, 840 F.Supp. 1548, 1556 (S.D.Fla.1993), aff 'd, 86 F.3d 1168 (11th Cir.1996).
discussed Cited "see" Hoffmann v. Sbarro, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kuchinskas v. Broward County, 840 F.Supp. 1548 (S.D.Fla.1993) (defendant entitled to window of corrections despite settled policy permitting improper deductions), aff'd, 86 F.3d 1168 (1996), cert. denied, - U.S.-, 117 S.Ct. 1080 , 137 L.Ed.2d 215 (1997); Simmons v. City of Fort Worth, Tex., 805 F.Supp. 419, 424-25 (N.D.Tx.1992) (window of correction applicable although citywide policy in effect over four years resulted in over 20% of the city’s exempt employees suffering improper deductions). 10 Other courts, however, including the Second Circuit, have interpreted the “window of correc…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Cooke v. General Dynamics Corp.
D. Conn. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
Barner v. City of Novato, 17 F.3d 1256 , 1261-62 (9th Cir.1994); Aaron v. City of Wichita, 54 F.3d 652, 658 (10th Cir.); Bennett v. City of Albuquerque, No. 94-2094, 1995 WL 230315 (10th Cir. Apr.18, 1995), (holding that absent a specific policy to reduce the amount of pay, as opposed to reductions in accrued benefits, the salary basis concept is not violated), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 965 , 116 S.Ct. 419 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995); see also Kuchinskas v. Broward County, 840 F.Supp. 1548, 1553 (S.D.Fla.l993)(holding that leave banks do not constitute salary and that any reduction to leave banks wo…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
O'Kaine
92-8423.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
May 15, 1996.
86 F.3d 1168
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 79%
Citer courts: D. Minnesota (1)

86 F.3d 1168

U.S.
v.
O'Kaine[*]

NO. 92-8423

United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.

May 15, 1996

Appeal From: S.D.Ga., No. 91-00165-CR-4-2

1

AFFIRMED.

*

Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 11th Cir.R. 34-3