green
Positive treatment
3.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1968
1997
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Barry S. Glaser v. Board of Bar Examiners, the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii
Tyler, 517 F.2d at 1103-05 ; Whitfield v. Illinois Bd. of Law Exam., 504 F.2d 474, 477-78 (7th Cir.1974); see Chaney v. State Bar of California, 386 F.2d 962, 966-67 (9th Cir.1967) (dicta), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1011 (1968).
discussed
Cited "see"
Albert E. Nasser v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board, Etc.
See Federal Home Loan Bank Board v. Elliott, 386 F.2d 42, 50-51 (9th Cir.1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1011 , 88 S.Ct. 1260 , 20 L.Ed.2d 161 (1968) (review of Bank Board orders under 12 U.S.C. § 1464 in the district court).
discussed
Cited "see"
Solomon Feldman, Jr. v. State Board of Law Examiners
See Chaney v. State Bar of California, 386 F.2d 962 (9th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1011 , 88 S.Ct. 1262 , 20 L.Ed.2d 162 , re denied, 391 U.S. 929 , 88 S.Ct. 1803 , 20 L.Ed.2d 670 (1968), where an attack on the form and type of examinations with the grading of necessity a matter of subjective discretionary evaluation concerning which there was no way to demonstrate its error was repulsed.
discussed
Cited "see"
James Holmes v. New York City Housing Authority
(2×)
See Chaney v. State Bar of California, 386 F.2d 962 (9th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1011 , 88 S.Ct. 1262 , 20 L.Ed.2d 162 (April 8, 1968); Powell v. Workmen's Comp.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jean Camerlo v. Howard Johnson Company
As codified in Pennsylvania, 20 Pa.Con.Stat.Ann. § 6104(b) (Purdon 1975), the rule states in relevant part: “Upon the expiration of the period allowed by the common law rule against perpetuities as measured by actual rather than possible events, any interest not then vested and any interest in members of a class the membership of which is then subject to increase shall be void.” The rule is designed to prevent unreasonable restraints on alienation, In re Estate of Mather, 410 Pa. 361, 370 , 189 A.2d 586, 591 (1963); see also Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. Philadelph…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Clifton C. Tang v. Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, First Department, and Honorable Justices Aron Steuer
See also Chaney v. State Bar of California, 386 F.2d 962, 966 (9th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1011 , 88 S.Ct. 1262 , 20 L.Ed.2d 162 (1968), (alternative ground for denying Sec. 1983 action challenging bar admission requirement-plaintiff had been denied Committee's certification, but only state supreme court had power to deny admission; plaintiff thus was not deprived of any right) 3 The concluding paragraph of this affidavit filed with the Appellate Division was: The sole question thus before the Court is the question as to whether or not residence as used in C.P.L.R.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Philadelphia Transportation Co.
v.
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
v.
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
No. 945.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 8, 1968.
Arnold R. Ginsburg and George J. Miller for Philadelphia Transportation Co. et al., and Francis T. Anderson for Janney et al., petitioners. William T. Coleman, Jr., Lewis H. Van Dusen, Jr., and Richardson Dilworth for Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, and Levy Anderson for the City of Philadelphia, respondents.
Published
Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.