Valdez v. United States, 444 U.S. 984 (1979). · Go Syfert
Search
Valdez v. United States, 444 U.S. 984 (1979). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
68 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 27 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Connie Lee Boling, A/K/A Heller Boling (88-3130) Thomas A. Lauback (88-3216) (ca6, 1989-09-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Connie Lee Boling, A/K/A Heller Boling (88-3130) Thomas A. Lauback (88-3216)
6th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Sandy, 605 F.2d 210, 215 (6th Cir.1979), cert. denied 444 U.S. 984 [, 100 S.Ct. 490 , 62 L.Ed.2d 412 ] (1979),” that “Lauback and Boling are the only indicted co-conspirators in the case,” and that the evidence did not prove that “any person other than defendant Lauback and defendant Boling, was a member of the conspiracy charged in [the conspiracy count].” The panel then held Under these circumstances we must also reverse Lauback’s conspiracy conviction and remand for a new trial, even though this may well be a “windfall for him.” Should either Lauback or …
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Heller C. Boling A/K/A Connie Boling (88-3130) Thomas A. Lauback (88-3216) (2×)
6th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Sandy, 605 F.2d 210, 215 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 984 , 100 S.Ct. 490 , 62 L.Ed.2d 412 (1979).
discussed Cited "see" Ray C. HAGEMAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. PHILIPS ROXANE LABORATORIES, INC., an Ohio Corporation, Defendant/Appellee (2×)
9th Cir. · 1980 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, Newcomer v. International Business Machines Corp., 598 F.2d 968, 969 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 984 , 100 S.Ct. 491 , 62 L.Ed.2d 413 (1979); Charlier v. S. C.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Church of Scientology of California v. Michael J. Flynn
9th Cir. · 1984 · signal: see also · confidence low
Under California law, “[tjhere is no requirement that the person defamed be mentioned by name____ It is sufficient if from the evidence the jury can infer that the defamatory statement applies to the plaintiff ... [or] if the publication points to the plaintiff by description or circumstance tending to identify him.” DiGiorgio Fruit Corp. v. AFL-CIO, 215 Cal.App.2d 560 , 30 Cal.Rptr. 350, 355 (1963); see also Bindrim v. Mitchell, 92 Cal.App.3d 61, 75-76 , 155 Cal.Rptr. 29, 37-38 (upholding a jury finding that the depiction of a fictitious character in a novel defamed the plaintiff even tho…
Valdez
v.
United States
No. 79-5594.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 3, 1979.
444 U.S. 984
Published

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.