green
Positive treatment
3.4 score
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gilman v. Wheat, First Securities, Inc.
Thus, it observed, “routing orders in listed stocks to OTC market makers and regional exchange specialists has more recently become a major source of order flow payments to retail broker-dealers.” Id. at 354, 674 N.E.2d at 284 (footnote omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Perryman v. Provident Life and Accident Ins. Co.
See Canseco v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust of Southern California, 93 F.3d 600, 608 (9th Cir.1996) (Court noted that the principle that an ERISA plan administrator may not impose a condition for eligibility not imposed by the plan language has been extended to disability benefits.), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1118 , 117 S.Ct. 1250 , 137 L.Ed.2d 331 (1997); Maronde v. Sumco USA Group Long-Term Disability Plan, 322 F.Supp.2d 1132, 1139 (D.Or.2004) ("Unless a plan contains specific requirements for objective medical evidence, a plan administrator cannot deny a claim for CFS simply because the…
discussed
Cited "see"
Gaudiya Vaishnava Society v. City of Monterey
See Carpenter v. City and County of San Francisco, 93 F.3d 627, 629 (9th Cir.1996) (looking to California Constitution rather than federal Constitution to resolve issue concerning free exercise of religion), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 1250 , 137 L.Ed.2d 331 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
De Dios Cortes v. MetLife, Inc.
See id.; Godfrey v. BellSouth Telecomms., Inc., 89 F.3d 755, 760-61 (11th Cir.1996) (holding that retroactive award of benefits proper remedy where district court made finding that claimant was disabled); see also Canseco v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for S. Cal., 93 F.3d 600, 609-10 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1118 , 117 S.Ct. 1250 , 137 L.Ed.2d 331 (1997) (concluding that remand appropriate where administrator erroneously construed plan provision, but not where no factual determinations remain to be made).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Los Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Angeles
Vernon v. City of Los Angeles, 27 F.3d 1385, 1391-92 (9th Cir.1994), “Where the state constitutional provisions are co-extensive with related federal constitutional provisions, we may decide the federal constitutional claims because that analysis will also decide the state constitutional claims. [Citation], However, where the state provisions offer more expansive protection than the federal constitution, we must address the state constitutional claims in order to avoid unnecessary consideration of the federal constitutional claims.” Id.; see also Carpenter v. City and County of San Francis…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Schroering
v.
Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co.
v.
Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co.
No. 96-1110.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 17, 1997.
Published
Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.