Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board (1976)
green
· 149 citation events
across 38 courts.
Showing the 11 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197620012026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Kelsey v. Minnesota (1977)
Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board, 429 U.S. 60, 61, n.1 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976); Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 , 92 S.Ct. 2593 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972). [O]nce a cognizable benefit is conferred or received, governmental action must not be employed to deprive or infringe upon that right without some form of prior hearing.
green
Kelsey v. State Of Minnesota (1977)
Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board, 429 U.S. 60, 61, n.1 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976); Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 , 92 S.Ct. 2593 , 33 L.Ed.2d 484 (1972) (O)nce a cognizable benefit is conferred or received, governmental action must not be employed to deprive or infringe upon that right without some form of prior hearing.
green
Nottelson v. Smith Steel Workers (1981)
See also Cummins v. Parker Seal Company, 516 F.2d 544, 551-554 (6th Cir. 1975), affirmed by an equally divided court, 429 U.S. 65 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 223 , vacated and remanded on another ground, 433 U.S. 903 . 13 Accordingly, the district court correctly adopted the holding in Tooley v. Martin-Marietta Corp., 476 F.Supp. 1027, 1030 (D.Ore.1979), that Section 701(j) "promotes the free exercise of religion without violating the Establishment Clause." 34 V.
green
Nottelson v. Smith Steel Workers D.A.L.U. 19806 (1981)
See also Cummins v. Parker Seal Company, 516 F.2d 544, 551-554 (6th Cir. 1975), affirmed by an equally divided court, 429 U.S. 65 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 223 , vacated and remanded on another ground, 433 U.S. 903 . 13 Accordingly, the district court correctly adopted the holding in Tooley v. Martin-Marietta Corp., 476 F.Supp. 1027, 1030 (D.Ore.1979), that Section 701(j) “promotes the free exercise of religion without violating the Establishment Clause.” V.
green
Williams v. Missouri Board of Probation & Parole (1978)
See Justice Steven’s dissenting opinion in Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board, 429 U.S. 60 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976), which was remanded for consideration of the question of mootness. 8 .
green
Eskridge v. Casson (1979)
See, Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board, 429 U.S. 60 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976) (Stevens, J., dissenting).
Stevens, J., dissenting
green
Nunley v. U. S. Board of Paroles (1977)
See Scott v. Kentucky Board of Parole, No. 74-1899 (unpublished Order January 15,1975) in which the Sixth Circuit held that the requirements of due process are not applicable to parole release hearings, vacated and remanded to consider mootness 429 U.S. 60 , 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976); Brown v. Lundgren, 528 F.2d 1050 (CA5 1976) (due process does not apply); United States ex rel.
due process does not apply
green
Martinez v. Oswald (1977)
See Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board, - U.S. -, 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976) (remanded for mootness consideration). *116 While the Supreme Court has not yet reached this issue, this court and others have found that at least certain elements of due process do apply to parole release proceedings.
remanded for mootness consideration
green
Crew v. United States Parole Board (1976)
See also Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board,U.S.-, 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976).
green
Sites v. McKenzie (1976)
See Justice Stevens’ dissenting opinion in Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board,-U.S.-, 97 S.Ct. 342 , 50 L.Ed.2d 218 (1976), which was remanded for consideration of the question of mootness.
green
State v. Huelsman (1978)
See Scott v. Kentucky Parole Board, 429 U.S. 60 (1976).