Jones v. Pitt County Board Of Education (1975)
green
· 18 citation events
across 8 courts.
Showing the 7 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
First American Bank of Virginia v. Ronald O. Kindschi v. Futuresoft Synergies, Inc., Rardin, Kenneth D., Gane… (1986)
See Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 1510-11 (1985); tenBraak v. Waffle Shops, Inc., 542 F.2d 919, 922 (4th Cir.1976); Jones v. Pitt County Board of Education, 528 F.2d 414, 417-18 (4th Cir.1975). 38 Kindschi's principal contention is that the memorandum was misleading because it failed to disclose a material change in the nature of FutureSoft's business.
green
Lula B. MILLER, Appellee, v. MERCY HOSPITAL, INCORPORATED, D/B/A Mercy Hospital, Appellant (1983)
Closely related is the obverse proposition that the conviction of mistake need not rest upon any perception by the reviewing court that the “actual” facts are indeed different from those “found” (though it may obviously include such a subjective perrception). 5 Thus, the conviction of mistake ^ Profrly be based UP°° ? bha> Wltb°í rd to what the actual facts may be, the findings under review . / were induced by an erroneous view of the controlling legal standard, see, e.g., U…
green
Washington v. Finlay (1981)
Assessing the evidence in these terms and considering that the burden of proof lay with the plaintiffs to prove unresponsiveness as an element of their dilution claim and not upon the defendants to prove responsiveness by way of rebuttal or avoidance, cf. Jones v. Pitt County Board of Education, 528 F.2d 414, 417 (4th Cir. 1975), we cannot declare the district court's finding against the plaintiffs on this issue to be clearly erroneous. 32 In terms of government employment, …
green
Washington v. Finlay (1981)
Assessing the evidence in these terms and considering that the burden of proof lay with the plaintiffs to prove unresponsiveness as an element of their dilution claim and not upon the defendants to prove responsiveness by way of rebuttal or avoidance, cf. Jones v. Pitt County Board of Education, 528 F.2d 414, 417 (4th Cir. 1975), we cannot declare the district court’s finding against the plaintiffs on this issue to be clearly erroneous.
green
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,351 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Commonwealth Chemical Securities, Inc. (1978)
Cf. Esso Standard Oil Co. v. Sun Oil Co., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 154 , 229 F.2d 37 , cert. denied, 351 U.S. 973 , 76 S.Ct. 1027 , 100 L.Ed. 1491 (1956); Jones v. Pitt County Board of Education, 528 F.2d 414, 418-19 (4 Cir. 1975) (Craven, J., dissenting).
Craven, J., dissenting
green
Toney v. Block (1983)
See Jones v. Pitt County Board of Education, 528 F.2d 414, 417-18 (4th Cir.1975); Hobson v. Eaton, 399 F.2d 781, 785 (6th Cir.1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 928 , 89 S.Ct. 1189 , 22 L.Ed.2d 459 (1969).
green
MATTER OF ESTATE OF COURTRIGHT v. Robertson (1978)
See, Jones v. Pitt County Board of Education, 528 F.2d 414 (4th Cir. 1975); Esso Standard Oil Co. v. Sun Oil Co., 97 U.S.App.