United States v. Herbert Mikelberg and Anthony F. Caterine (1975)

green · 40 citation events across 9 courts. Showing the 19 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).

All Green 19

Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then

197520002026

Sort: By significance · Most recent

green United States v. Gary Greene, United States of America v. Harry L. Grant, United States of America v. Ronald … (1983)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion

United States v. National Dairy Products Corp., 372 U.S. 29 , 83 S.Ct. 594 , 9 L.Ed.2d 561 (1963); see Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 , 92 S.Ct. 2294 , 33 L.Ed.2d 222 (1972); Boyce Motor Lines, Inc. v. United States, 342 U.S. 337 , 72 S.Ct. 329 , 96 L.Ed. 367 (1952); Stansberry v. Holmes, 613 F.2d 1285 (5th Cir.1980); United States v. Mikelburg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir.1975) cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976); Turf Center, Inc. v…

green United States v. Arthur Turcks (1994)

Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.

United States v. Abod, 770 F.2d 1293, 1296-97 (5th Cir.1985) (rejecting defendant’s argument that he could not be convicted of three counts for using the same card to obtain over $3,000 in value); United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir.1975) (rejecting defendant's contention that the government could not aggregate multiple transactions to meet the jurisdictional requirement), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976); see also United …

green United States v. Turcks (1994)

Rule Authority · 3rd Cir.

United States v. Abod, 770 F.2d 1293, 1296-97 (5th Cir. 1985) (rejecting defendant's argument that he could not be convicted of three counts for using the same card to obtain over $3,000 in value); United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir. 1975) (rejecting defendant's contention that the government could not aggregate multiple transactions to meet the jurisdictional requirement), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 (1976); see also United States v. Helgesen, 669 F.2d 69…

rejecting defendant's contention that the government could not aggregate multiple transactions to meet the jurisdictional requirement

green United States v. Sosa (1993)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

United States v. Picquet, 963 F.2d 54, 56 (5th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 290 (1992) (citing United 7 States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 (1976)).

green United States v. Jose Hernandez Sosa (1993)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

United States v. Picquet, 963 F.2d 54, 56 (5th Cir.1992), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 290 , 121 L.Ed.2d 215 (1992) (citing United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976)).

green U.S. v. Picquet (1992)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir. 1975).

green United States v. Veronica Picquet (1992)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir.1975).

green United States v. Beverly C. Ryan (1990)

Rule Authority · 10th Cir. · signal: cf.

Cf. United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976) (for purposes of 15 U.S.C. § 1644 , “Congress intended to confine the aggregating of purchases only to those purchases made ‘in a transaction affecting interstate or foreign commerce.’ ”).

green United States v. David Samuel Iredia (1989)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

In support of his argument, the appellant looks to our interpretation of the credit card section of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1644 in United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 250 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976).

green Stansberry v. Holmes (1980)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 , 110, 92 S.Ct. 2294, 2300 , 33 L.Ed.2d 222 (1971); United States v. National Dairy Products Corp., 372 U.S. 29, 32 , 83 S.Ct. 594, 597 , 9 L.Ed.2d 561 (1963); United States v. Mikelburg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir. 1975), Cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976).

green Stansberry v. Holmes (1980)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir.

Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 , 110, 92 S.Ct. 2294, 2300 , 33 L.Ed.2d 222 (1971); United States v. National Dairy Products Corp., 372 U.S. 29, 32 , 83 S.Ct. 594, 597 , 9 L.Ed.2d 561 (1963); United States v. Mikelburg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976).

green The Industrial Development Board of the Town of Section, Alabama v. Fuqua Industries, Inc., the Industrial De… (1975)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · signal: cf.

Cf. United States v. Mikelberg, 5 Cir. 1975, 517 F.2d 246, 254 (even if question whether a transaction affected interstate commerce should have gone to jury, failure to instruct on issue was not reversible error, where the appellate court from undisputed evidence found that for the jury "to have found otherwise would be inconceivable") 14 See also Troupe v. Chicago, D. & G.

green Industrial Development Board v. Fuqua Industries, Inc. (1975)

Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · signal: cf.

Cf. United States v. Mikelberg, 5 Cir. 1975, 517 F.2d 246, 254 (even if question whether a transaction affected interstate commerce should have gone to jury, failure to instruct on issue was not reversible error, where the appellate court from undisputed evidence found that for the jury “to have found otherwise would be inconceivable”). .

green United States v. Jimicum (1985)

Rule Authority · E.D. Wash.

See, e.g., Weatherington v. Moore, 577 F.2d 1073, 1075 (6th Cir.1978); United States v. Cahalane, 560 F.2d 601 , 606 (3rd Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1045 , 98 S.Ct. 890 , 54 L.Ed.2d 796 (1978); United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 254 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976); Widdis v. United States, 395 F.Supp. 1015 (D.

green Percy Leo Dobard v. W.E. Johnson, Warden, Holman Correctional Institution (1985)

Cited (see also) · 11th Cir. · signal: see also · 2 citations in this opinion

See 1 U.S.C. § 1 (1982) (“In determining the meaning of any Act or resolution of Congress, words importing the singular number may extend and be applied to several persons or things....”); see also U.S. v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246 (5th Cir.1975) (applying statute to Truth in Lending Act), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 909 , 96 S.Ct. 1104 , 47 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976); accord Toy Manufacturers of America, Inc. v. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 630 F.2d 70 (2d Cir.1980).

green United States v. John Digilio, in No. 75-2218. Appeal of Harry Lupo, in No. 75-2219. Appeal of Peter Szwandra… (1976)

Cited (see also) · 3rd Cir. · signal: compare · 2 citations in this opinion

Compare United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246 (5th Cir. 1975). .

green United States v. Peter Adamo Appeal of Vincent Kearney (1976)

Cited · 3rd Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion

See United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 250-52 (5th Cir. 1975). .

green APA Excelsior III L.P. v. Premiere Technologies, Inc. (2007)

Cited · 11th Cir. · signal: accord

Because the legislature is presumed to act with sensible and reasonable purpose, a statute should, if at all possible, be read so “ ‘as to avoid an unjust or absurd conclusion.’ ” Id. (quoting In re Chapman, 166 U.S. 661, 667 , 17 S.Ct. 677 , 41 L.Ed. 1154 (1897)); accord United States v. Mikelberg, 517 F.2d 246, 252 (5th Cir.1975) (“ ‘A basic principle of statutory construction enjoins us from imputing to the Legislature an intent to produce an absurd result.’ ”) (citations…

green United States v. Remi Olu Abod (1985)

Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see

See 517 F.2d at 252 .