green
Positive treatment
4.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Earl v. The Boeing Company
Thus, while district courts have the inherent power to stay proceedings pending before them, this power is incidental to the power inherent in every court “to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” In re Beebe, 56 F.3d 1384 , 1995 WL 337666, at *2 (5th Cir. May 15, 1995) (quoting Landis v. N. Am.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Myer v. Chater
Sept 17, 1996 1 Appeal From: E.D.Tex., No. 1:94-CV-567, 56 F.3d 1384 2 VACATED.
discussed
Cited "see"
Herbert Fletcher v. United States
Fed.R.CivP. 72(a); see Tucker v. United States Dep’t of Army, 56 F.3d 1384 , 1995 WL 337670, at *2 (5th Cir. May 16, 1995) (per curiam) (holding that motion for default judgment was properly denied by the district court because magistrate judge had authority under Rule 72(a) to grant party’s motion to extend time).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lentz v. Cahaba Disaster Relief, LLC (In re CDP Corp.)
See Wedgeworth, 706 F.2d 541 ; see also In re Beebe, No. 95-20244, 1995 WL 337666 , at *2 and n. 10 (5th Cir. May 15, 1995) (citing Wedgeworth in context of discussion regarding district court’s authority to control its own docket); Morris v. Wyeth, Inc., No. 09-0854, 2011 WL 311009 , at *1 (W.D.La.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In re M.J. Beebe[*]
NO. 95-20244
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
May 15, 1995
Appeal From: S.D.Tex., No. CA-H-89-3174
REMANDED.
*
Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 5th Cir.R. 34.2