green
Positive treatment
4.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Moss v. Block (In Re Moss)
See Bernard v. Coyne (In re Bernard), 40 F.3d 1028, 1031-32 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1065 , 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
P.B. v. Koch
See Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1089 (9th Cir.1994) (“In the absence of preexisting binding precedent within this circuit, this court look[s] at all available decisional law including decisions ... of other circuits to determine whether a plaintiff has shown that the illegality of a defendant’s conduct should have been apparent when it occurred.”), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
P.B., on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of N.B., a Minor S.G., on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of L.G., a Minor C.D., on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of D.D. v. Alfred Koch, Principal of Preston High School, and Scott Beckstead Mary Jo Roberts George Wilcox Orson Bowler
See Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1089 (9th Cir.1994) ("In the absence of preexisting binding precedent within this circuit, this court look[s] at all available decisional law including decisions ... of other circuits to determine whether a plaintiff has shown that the illegality of a defendant's conduct should have been apparent when it occurred."), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995). 23 Moreover, although the Ninth Circuit had not explicitly addressed a student's right to be free from arbitrary corporal punishment or other excessive force, established due pr…
discussed
Cited "see"
Donald K. Nelson v. Thomas Henson, Investigator Abe Kakar, Investigator William Dzidaura, Investigator Nolan Thompson, Investigator Eugene Sandoval, Captain Peter Ortiz, Sgt. Darlene Lasswell, Cso William R. White, Sgt. A.J. Rodriguez, Cpo, II Norman Green, Cpo II Sgt. Payne Sgt. Palosaari Merry Lutz, Captain Arizona Department of Corrections, a State Agency John Banker, Attorney David A. Brown, Deputy Attorney General Navajo County, an Arizona County
See Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1090 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995). 6 As far as self-representation is concerned, we have no doubt that a defendant has the right to be free from substantial interference which harms him by taking away his ultimate control over his defense.
discussed
Cited "see"
Martino v. First National Bank of Harvey (In Re Garofalo's Finer Foods, Inc.)
See United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191, 1203 (7th Cir.1985) (“[s]eetion 455 clearly contemplates that decisions with respect to disqualification should be made by the judge sitting in the case, and not by another *441 judge”), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1095 , 106 S.Ct. 1490 , 89 L.Ed.2d 892 (1986); accord Bernard v. Coyne (In re Bernard), 31 F.3d 842 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Apsitis
See In re Bernard, 40 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1695 (1995); In re Pikush, 157 B.R. 155 (Bankr. 9th Cir. 1993), aff'd, 27 F.3d 386 (9th Cir. 1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Barnes
See e.g., Bernard, v. Coyne (In re Bernard), 40 F.3d 1028 , 1032 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1065 , 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 ; Kennedy v. Pikush (In re Pikush), 157 B.R. 155 (9th Cir. BAP 1993), affirmed, 27 F.3d 386 (9th Cir.1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Chubb & Son, Inc. v. Clark (In Re Clark)
See also Bernard v. Coyne (In re Bernard), 40 F.3d 1028 , 1031 n. 4 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1065 , 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995) (trustee “has broad discretion whether to adjourn or conclude the meeting,” depending on the degree of satisfactory information provided by the debtor).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
May v. Baldwin
Compare Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082 , 1088 (9th Cir.1994) (stating that a long-term deprivation of exercise is a denial of a basic human need in violation of the Eighth Amendment), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995); Spain v. Procunier, 600 F.2d 189, 199-200 (9th Cir. 1979) (concluding that the deprivation of outdoor exercise for a “period of years” contra venes the Eighth Amendment).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2006, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3697 David L. May v. G.H. Baldwin, Superintendent Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution Strogham, Hearings Officer at Eoci Al Chandler, Administrator, Oregon Department of Corrections Classification and Transfer Division M. Barth, Captain, Oregon Department of Corrections Transportation Manager J. Ramsey, Lieutenant Oregon Department of Corrections Transportation Program Assistant Manager
Compare Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1088 (9th Cir.1994) (stating that a long-term deprivation of exercise is a denial of a basic human need in violation of the Eighth Amendment), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995); Spain v. Procunier, 600 F.2d 189, 199-200 (9th Cir.1979) (concluding that the deprivation of outdoor exercise for a "period of years" contravenes the Eighth Amendment).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gazes v. DeArakie (In Re DeArakie)
Compare Bernard v. Coyne (In re Bernard), 40 F.3d 1028, 1031 (9th Cir.1994) (trustee has the right to continue the creditor’s meeting if he reasonably believes that the purposes of the § 341 meeting have not been filled), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995); Petit v. Fessenden, 182 B.R. 59 , 62-63 & n. 4 (same), aff'd an, other grounds, 80 F.3d 29 (1st Cir.1996); with In re Levitt, 137 B.R. 881 (Bankr.D.Mass.1992) (if trustee does not set the adjourned date within thirty days of last § 341 meeting, then meeting is automatically deemed concluded).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5655, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9212 Robert Roe v. Helen M. Sherry, Special Agent Ray Larabee Christopher Yohn U.S. Naval Investigative Services United States of America
A fundamental inquiry in a qualified immunity analysis is "whether the plaintiff has asserted a violation of a constitutional right at all." Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 , 111 S.Ct. 1789, 1793 , 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991); see also Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1090 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995). 9 B.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roe v. Sherry
A fundamental inquiry in a qualified immunity analysis is “whether the plaintiff has asserted a violation of a constitutional right at all.” Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 , 111 S.Ct. 1789, 1793 , 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991); see also Allen v. Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1090 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1695 , 131 L.Ed.2d 559 (1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Alan BERNARD, et ux.
v.
Jeffrey COYNE, etc.
v.
Jeffrey COYNE, etc.
No. 94-1403.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 17, 1995.
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
[*1696] Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.