green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.9 score
“congress appears to use the terms 'detention' and 'custody' interchangeably in the habeas context.”
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Graoch Associates 33, L. P. v. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Human Relations Commission
(2×)
See Simms v. First Gibraltar Bank, 83 F.3d 1546, 1555 (5th Cir.) (citing Hanson v. Veterans Admin., 800 F.2d 1381, 1386 (5th Cir.1986)), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1041 , 117 S.Ct. 610 , 136 L.Ed.2d 535 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Brice v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
See Poodry v. Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, 85 F.3d 874 , 885 n. 14 (2nd Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1041 , 117 S.Ct. 610 , 136 L.Ed.2d 535 (1996); Demontiney v. United States, 255 F.3d 801, 815 n. 6 (9th Cir.2001); Bank of Oklahoma v. Muscogee (Creek) Nation, 972 F.2d 1166 , 1170 (10th Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dana Leigh Thompson v. County of Franklin and Bryon A. Varin, Treasurer of Franklin County
(2×)
The case law establishes unmistakably that “[a] tribe’s right to define its own membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to its existence as an independent political community.” Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 , 72 n. 32, 98 S.Ct. 1670 , 56 L.Ed.2d 106 (1978); accord Poodry v. Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, 85 F.3d 874, 880 (2d Cir.) (recognizing that among the foremost powers retained by the Indian tribes in the exercise of their quasi-sovereign status is the right, “absent limitation by treaty or federal statute ... to determine questions of m…
cited
Cited "see"
Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
See Poodry v. Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, 85 F.3d 874 , 877 n. 1 (2d Cir.1996) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1041 , 117 S.Ct. 610 , 136 L.Ed.2d 535 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dews v. Town of Sunnyvale, Tex.
(2×)
See Simms v. First Gibraltar Bank, 83 F.3d 1546, 1556 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1041 , 117 S.Ct. 610 , 136 L.Ed.2d 535 (1996) (analogizing to the discriminatory intent test for claims brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act).
cited
Cited "see"
Douglas Dry Rosie Burlison Juanita McConnell v. Cfr Court of Indian Offenses for the Choctaw Nation James Wolfe, Magistrate
See Poodry v. Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, 85 F.3d 874, 890-93 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1041 , 117 S.Ct. 610 , 136 L.Ed.2d 535 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Dry v. Choctaw CFR Court
See Poodry v. Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, 85 F.3d 874, 890-93 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 610 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Unbelievable, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
As the Sixth, Seventh and Ninth Circuits have recognized, Summit Valley “rested ... on factors peculiar to section 303(b) [of the LMRA], which ... expressly states its remedies and was not intended to encompass attorney’s fees, according to the ‘persuasive evidence’ of congressional intent.” Bennett v. Local Union No. 66, Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics and Allied Workers Int’l Union, AFL-CIO, 958 F.2d 1429 , 1440 n. 9 (7th Cir.1992); see Wilson v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO, 83 F.3d 747, 754 (6th Cir.), cert.…
discussed
Cited "see"
Unbelievable, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
As the Sixth, Seventh and Ninth Circuits have recognized, Summit Valley "rested ... on factors peculiar to section 303(b) [of the LMRA], which ... expressly states its remedies and was not intended to encompass attorney's fees, according to the 'persuasive evidence' of congressional intent." Bennett v. Local Union No. 66, Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics and Allied Workers Int'l Union, AFL-CIO, 958 F.2d 1429 , 1440 n. 9 (7th Cir.1992); see Wilson v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO, 83 F.3d 747, 754 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 519…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Barry v. Bergen County Probation Department
Ct. v. Lydon, 466 U.S. 294, 301 , 104 S.Ct. 1805, 1810 , 80 L.Ed.2d 311 (1984) (pretrial release on personal recognizance constitutes custody); Hensley, 411 U.S. at 349-51 , 93 S.Ct. at 1573-75 (release on personal recognizance pending execution of sentence constitutes custody); Jones, 371 U.S. at 240-43 , 83 S.Ct. at 375-77 (parole tantamount to custody); see also Barry, 864 F.2d at 296 (probation constitutes custody for habeas corpus purposes). 66 Despite this "subtle shift[ ]" in the custody requirement, see Lefkowitz v. Fair, 816 F.2d 17, 19 (1st Cir.1987), courts continue to recognize tha…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Simms
v.
First Madison Bank, FSB
v.
First Madison Bank, FSB
No. 96-620.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 16, 1996.
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.