green
Positive treatment
5.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Northeast Women's Center, Inc. v. McMonagle
In Sedima, the Court rejected the notion of any distinct “racketeering injury,” 473 U.S. at 495-97 , 106 S.Ct. at 3284-86, holding expressly that it is not necessary that a plaintiff show that it suffered “a competitive injury.” Id. at 497 n. 16, 105 S.Ct. at 3286 n. 16.
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilson v. Philadelphia Detention Center
“The Rule 50(b) motion may consider only specific grounds asserted in the motion for a directed verdict.” Orlando v. Billcon Int’l, Inc., 822 F.2d 1294 , 1298 (3d Cir.1987); see Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp., 752 F.2d 802, 814 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986); Abraham v. Pekarski, 728 F.2d 167, 172 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1242 , 104 S.Ct. 3513 , 82 L.Ed.2d 822 (1984); Mallick v. International Bhd. of Elec.
discussed
Cited "see"
Anserphone, Inc. v. Bell Atlantic Corp.
See 15 U.S.C. § 15 . *426 “To survive a summary judgment motion on its Sherman Act § 2 monopolization claim, [plaintiff must] show that (1) [defendants] possessed monopoly power in the relevant market, and that (2) [defendants] willfully acquired and maintained monopoly power and did not acquire its monopoly share due to ‘growth or development as a consequence of a superior product, business acumen, or historical accident.’ ” Ideal Dairy, 90 F.3d at 749 (quoting Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp., 752 F.2d 802, 808 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 328…
discussed
Cited "see"
Crymes v. State
(2×)
See Crowe v. State , 485 So.2d 351 , 362-63 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984), reversed on other grounds, 485 So.2d 373 (Ala. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 909 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 (1986) (wherein the victim's widow sat at the counsel table, over the appellant's objection, and began crying during the pathologist's testimony, but the trial judge refused to remove her from the counsel table.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Nevius
Under section 1001, “the test for materiality is whether the false statement has a tendency to influence or is capablé of influencing a federal agency.” Brack, 747 F.2d at 1147 ; see United States v. Brantley, 786 F.2d 1322, 1326 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kent Clark v. Michael O'Leary and Attorney General of the State of Illinois, Respondents
(2×)
See United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191, 1216-1217 (7th Cir.1985) (no abuse of discretion to limit cross-examination of government agent witness’ knowledge of collateral matters and undisclosed information in highly sensitive telex sealed by trial court), certiorari denied, 477 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 ; United States v. Muelbl, 739 F.2d at 1184-1185 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Joyner
See United States v. Brantley, 786 F.2d 1322, 1327 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. State of Delaware Department of Health & Social Services
See Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp., 752 F.2d 802, 814 (3d Cir.), cert. denied — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fischer Bros. v. NWA, Inc.
Accord, Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp., 559 F.Supp. 922 (E.D.Pa.1983), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986); and Juneau Square Corp. v. First Wisconsin National Bank of Milwaukee, 445 F.Supp. 965 (E.D.Wis.1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Smith v. State
(2×)
See also Crowe v. State, 485 So.2d 351, 362-63 (Ala.Crim.App.1984), rev'd on other grounds, 485 So.2d 373 (Ala.1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 909 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 (1986) (the murder victim's widow, who sat at the counsel table, cried during the pathologist's testimony, but the trial judge refused to remove her from the counsel table).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Williams v. State
(2×)
See also Crowe v. State , 485 So.2d 351 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984), rev'd on other grounds, 485 So.2d 373 (Ala. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 909 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Williams v. State
(2×)
See also Crowe v. State, 485 So.2d 351 (Ala.Cr.App.1984), rev’d on other grounds, 485 So.2d 373 (Ala.1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 909 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Eugene Robert Wallach, A/K/A \E. Robert (Bob) Wallach\"
(2×)
See In re Subpoena of Persico, 522 F.2d 41, 63 (2 Cir.1975) (technical provisions in special prosecutor statutes are intended to protect the government, not to limit the power to prosecute); see also United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191, 1208-09 (7 Cir.1985) ("[T]here is no evidence that Congress intended [certain technical provisions of the Judicial Code] as safeguards for the benefit of those whose indictment might be sought”.), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908 [ 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 ] (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Frazier v. State
(2×)
See also Crowe v. State , 485 So.2d 351 , 364-65 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984), reversed on other grounds, 485 So.2d 373 (Ala. 1985), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 909 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 573 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. William F. Shriver
See, e.g., United States v. Brantley, 786 F.2d 1322, 1329 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986) (misappropriation of funds by use of youth organization's credit card for personal purposes admissible to show defendant's intent, and is similar to charge of defrauding the organization in a furniture leasing arrangement). 9 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Avemco Ins. Co. v. Capital Control, Inc.
See also United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 , 1205 n. 14 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 106 S.Ct. 3284 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Garner
Under the plain error doctrine, we must search for "an actual miscarriage of justice, which implies the conviction of one who but for the error would have been acquitted." United States v. Silverstein, 732 F.2d 1338, 1349 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1111 , 105 S.Ct. 792 , 83 L.Ed.2d 785 (1985); see also United States v. Brantley, 786 F.2d 1322, 1328 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986). 101 The defendant argues that he had not raised the issue of the Wagner & Sons notebook in his argument, and that the issue of intent, to which the prosecut…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Garner
Under the plain error doctrine, we must search for “an actual miscarriage of justice, which implies the conviction of one who but for the error would have been acquitted.” United States v. Silverstein, 732 F.2d 1338, 1349 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1111 , 105 S.Ct. 792 , 83 L.Ed.2d 785 (1985); see also United States v. Brantley, 786 F.2d 1322, 1328 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 477 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jerry Whaley
See also United States v. Brantley, 786 F.2d 1322, 1328 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, —U.S.-, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986), and United States v. Gironda, 758 F.2d 1201, 1216 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1004 , 106 S.Ct. 523 , 88 L.Ed.2d 456 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
International Distribution Centers, Inc. v. Walsh Trucking Co.
See also Terry's Floor Fashions v. Burlington Industries, 568 F.Supp. 205, 215 (E.D.N.C.1983), aff'd, 763 F.2d 604 , 606 n. 1, 615 (4th Cir.1985), Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Co., 752 F.2d 802 , 811 n. 3 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986); Von Kalinowski, 3 Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation § 9.02[1] at 9-35 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
International Distribution Centers, Inc. v. Walsh Trucking Co.
See also Terry's Floor Fashions v. Burlington Industries, 568 F.Supp. 205, 215 (E.D.N.C.1983), aff'd, 763 F.2d 604 , 606 n. 1, 615 (4th Cir.1985), Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Co., 752 F.2d 802 , 811 n. 3 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 106 S.Ct. 3284 , 91 L.Ed.2d 572 (1986); Von Kalinowski, 3 Antitrust Laws and Trade Regulation Sec. 9.02 at 9-35 (1986) Courts have confused the elements of conspiracy to monopolize with those of attempt to monopolize.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Boggild
v.
Kenner Products, a Division of CPG Products Corp.
v.
Kenner Products, a Division of CPG Products Corp.
No. 85-1579.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 23, 1986.
Published
C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of American Intellectual Property Law Association for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied.