How cited: Cluster 507168 · Go Syfert

Cluster 507168 (1988)

green · 25 citation events across 10 courts. Showing the 15 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198820072026
Rule Authority · 6th Cir.
George, 882 F.2d 1485 , 1489 n. 5 (10th Cir.1989) (same), Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 885-86 (8th Cir.1988) (same), modified on other grounds, 860 F.2d 296 (8th Cir.1988), and Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. Zielke, 845 F.2d 1463 , 1470 (7th Cir.1988) (same).
Rule Authority · 6th Cir.
George, 882 F.2d 1485 , 1489 n. 5 (10th Cir.1989) (same), Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 885-86 (8th Cir.1988) (same), modified on other grounds, 860 F.2d 296 (8th Cir.1988), and Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. Zielke, 845 F.2d 1463 , 1470 (7th Cir.1988) (same).
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 889 (8th Cir.1988). 3 About one month after this court affirmed the district court's dismissal, the Supreme Court held that taxpayers have standing to bring first amendment establishment clause challenges to programs such as Title I. 2 Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U.S. 589, 618-20 , 108 S.Ct. 2562, 2579-80 , 101 L.Ed.2d 520 (1988).
green Pulido v. Cavazos (1991)
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 889 (8th Cir.1988).
Rule Authority · D.N.D. · 2 citations in this opinion
Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 886 (8th Cir.1988).
green Abuirshaid v. Johnson (2015)
Rule Authority · E.D. Va.
This issue need not be reached here, as the constitutional claims are properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. .See also United States v. Fausto, 484 U.S. 439, 448-49 , 108 S.Ct. 668 , 98 L.Ed.2d 830 (1988) (providing that where a specific statute provides subject matter jurisdiction, general federal question jurisdiction is not applicable); Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 886 (8th Cir.1988) (stating that "[i]t is well established that when a statute spec…
Rule Authority · E.D. Mo.
Dist. v. Wilhoit, 854 F.Supp. 1430, 1435 (E.D.Ark.1994) (quoting Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 887 (8th Cir.1988)).
Rule Authority · E.D. Ark.
The Eighth Circuit held that the declaratory judgment statute “does not expand the District Courts’ jurisdiction, but merely authorizes them to declare the legal rights of parties in cases over which they would otherwise have jurisdiction.” Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 887 (8th Cir.1988).
Cited (see also) · 8th Cir. · signal: see also
All a taxpayer—“in his capacity as a district taxpayer”—needs to show is “a measurable appropriation or disbursement of school-district funds occasioned solely by the activities complained of.” Doremus, 342 U.S. at 434 (second quotation); Everson v. Bd. of Educ. of Ewing Twp., 330 U.S. 1, 3 (1947) (first quotation); see also Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 886 (8th Cir. 1988) -6- (denying state and municipal taxpayer standing when “no state or local tax funds” were used in …
Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 888 (8th Cir.1988) ("[b]ecause [the plaintiff] ... sued as next friend of the children in her care, her standing depended on that of the children"), rev'd on other grounds, 860 F.2d 296 , 297-98 (8th Cir.1988).
Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 888 (8th Cir.1988) ("[bjecause [the plaintiff] ... sued as next friend of the children in her care, her standing depended on that of the children”), rev'd on other grounds, 860 F.2d 296 , 297-98 (8th Cir.1988).
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
See Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 888 (8th Cir.), rev'd on other grounds on rehearing, 860 F.2d 296 (8th Cir.1988); see also Hope, Inc. v. County of DuPage, 738 F.2d 797, 803 (7th Cir.1984) (applying "clearly erroneous" rule to standing determination in case involving fourteenth amendment claim).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 888 (8th Cir.), rev’d on other grounds on rehearing, 860 F.2d 296 (8th Cir.1988); see also Hope, Inc. v. County of DuPage, 738 F.2d 797, 803 (7th Cir.1984) (applying “clearly erroneous” rule to standing determination in case involving fourteenth amendment claim).
Cited · D. Minnesota · signal: see
See Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880, 886-87 (8th Cir.), modified, 860 F.2d 296 (8th Cir.1988) (where statute specifically provides for exclusive jurisdiction in one court, Congress’ specific grant of jurisdiction takes precedence over a general grant of jurisdiction); Southwestern Bell Tel.
green Pulido v. Cavazos (1989)
Cited · W.D. Mo. · signal: see
See Pulido v. Bennett, 848 F.2d 880 (8th Cir.1988). 4 Shortly after the Eighth Circuit issued its decision the Supreme Court, in Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U.S. 589 , 108 S.Ct. 2562 , 101 L.Ed.2d 520 (1988), held that taxpayers have standing to bring first amendment establishment clause challenges to programs such as Title I.