green
Positive treatment
4.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Unincorporated Operating Division of Indiana Newspapers, Inc. v. Trustees of Indiana University
See Cooper v. Dep't of Navy, 594 F.2d 484 (5th Cir.1979) (Navy could not deny plaintiffs access to portions of accident report in civil action against helicopter manufacturer where Navy had allowed manufacturer access to same), cert. denied 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 ; N. Dakota ex rel.
cited
Cited "see"
Garside v. Webster
See Cooper v. Dept. of the Navy, 558 F.2d 274, 278 (5th Cir.1977), aff'd in part and reversed in part, 594 F.2d 484, 488 , cert. denied, 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Badhwar v. United States Department of Air Force
See Cooper v. Department of the Navy, 558 F.2d 274, 275-76 (5th Cir.1977), modified on rehearing, 594 F.2d 484 (5th Cir.1974), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fiumara v. Higgins
See Cooper v. Department of Navy of United States, 594 F.2d 484, 486 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979); see also Cooper v. Internal Revenue Service, 450 F.Supp. 752, 754 (D.D.C.1977) (release of evidentiary exhibits to court, thus opening information to public inspection, waives confidentiality exemption).
cited
Cited "see"
Weber Aircraft Corporation, a Division of Walter Kidde and Company, Inc., and Mills Manufacturing Corporation v. United States
See Cooper v. Department of the Navy, 558 F.2d 274, 276 (1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
V. Lamar Skelton v. United States Postal Service
See Cooper v. Department of the Navy, 558 F.2d 274, 278 (5th Cir. 1977), modified on other grounds on rehearing, 594 F.2d 484 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979); Wu v. National Endowment for Humanities, 460 F.2d 1030, 1033 (5th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 926 , 93 S.Ct. 1352 , 35 L.Ed.2d 586 (1973); Lead Indus.
discussed
Cited "see"
National Western Life Insurance v. United States
See Cooper v. Dept. of Navy of U.S., 558 F.2d 274, 275 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979). 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(6) 5 is an exception to the general rule.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Headwaters, Inc. v. Bureau of Land Management
We have previously observed that “[t]he provisions of 43 U.S.C. § 1181a make it clear that the primary use of the [0 & C Act] lands is for timber production to be managed in conformity with the provision of sustained yield.” O’Neal v. United States, 814 F.2d 1285, 1287 (9th Cir.1987); see also Skoko v. Andrus, 638 F.2d 1154, 1156 (9th Cir.) (Skoko) (The 0 & C Act “provided that most of the 0 & C lands would henceforth be managed for sustained-yield timber production.”), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 927 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Headwaters, Inc. v. Bureau Of Land Management
Sec. 1181a make it clear that the primary use of the [O & C Act] lands is for timber production to be managed in conformity with the provision of sustained yield." O'Neal v. United States, 814 F.2d 1285, 1287 (9th Cir.1987); see also Skoko v. Andrus, 638 F.2d 1154, 1156 (9th Cir.) (Skoko ) (The O & C Act "provided that most of the O & C lands would henceforth be managed for sustained-yield timber production."), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 927 , 100 S.Ct. 266 , 62 L.Ed.2d 183 (1979). 50 While these statements are arguably dicta, we are convinced of their accuracy. 43 U.S.C.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Skoko, Board of County Commissioners of Clackamas County, Oregon
v.
Andrus, Secretary of the Interior
v.
Andrus, Secretary of the Interior
No. 79-197.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 29, 1979.
Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.