McCloud v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. (1983)
green
· 204 citation events
across 43 courts.
Showing the 15 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198320042026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Jacqueline M. Harris, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor-Appellant v. Amoco Production Co. (1985)
They are, however, nothing more than procedural prerequisites to the court’s determination of the substantive issues.” Id. at 524 ; see also Nilsen v. City of Moss Point, 674 F.2d 379, 383-84 (5th Cir.1982). 18 Similarly, in Pin kard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211 (5th Cir.1982) (per curiam), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983), we applied Zipes to hold under section 706(f)(1), that “the receipt of a right-to-sue letter is not a jurisdicti…
green
Dennis Skinner, and Cross-Appellant v. Total Petroleum, Inc., a Michigan Corporation, and Cross-Appellee (1988)
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, a Div. of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983); DeMatteis v. Eastman Kodak Co., 511 F.2d 306 (2d Cir.1975); Price v. Federal Express Corp., 660 F.Supp. 1388 (D.Colo.1987); Perry v. Manocherian, 675 F.Supp. 1417 (S.D.N.Y.1987); Ragheb v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich., 467 F.Supp. 94 (E.D.Mich.1979); Liotta v. National Forge Co., 473 F.Supp. 1139 (W.D.Pa.1979), aff’…
green
William B. Larkin Louise Seals, as Personal Representative of Spurgeon Seals, Deceased Lillie Lofton, as Pers… (1988)
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (11th Cir.1982) ("the receipt of a right-to-sue letter subsequent to the commencement of a Title VII action, but while the action remains pending, satisfies the precondition that a plaintiff obtain statutory notice of the right to sue before filing a civil action"), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
green
Larkin v. Pullman-Standard Division, Pullman, Inc. (1988)
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (11th Cir.1982) (“the receipt of a right-to-sue letter subsequent to the commencement of a Title VII action, but while the action remains pending, satisfies the precondition that a plaintiff obtain statutory notice of the right to sue before filing a civil action"), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
green
Lucius T. SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. Hugh HARDISON, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees (1985)
See also Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, a Division of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211, 1216-17 (5th Cir. Unit B 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
See, e.g., Pinkard v. Pullman Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1219 (5th Cir. Unit B 1982) (per curiam), cert. denied, —U.S. —, 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983); accord Fouche v. Jekyll Island-State Park Auth., 713 F.2d 1518, 1525 (11th Cir.1982); Perdue v. Roy Stone Transfer Corp., 690 F.2d 1091, 1093 (4th Cir.1982); Watson v. Fuller Brush Co., 570 F.Supp. 1299 (W.D.Mich.1983); Black v. Brown Univ., 555 F.Supp. 880, 884 (D.R.I.1983).
green
State v. Hicks (1984)
State v. Rachal, 428 So.2d 805 (La.1983); State v. Jones, supra; State v. Grey, 408 So.2d 1239 (La.1982); State v. Bing, 410 So.2d 227 (La.1982); compare, State v. Fergus, 418 So.2d 594 (La.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1106 , 103 S.Ct. 730 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
green
Elliott v. Elliott (1996)
Jenks v. Jenks, 385 S.W.2d 370, 380 (Mo.App.1964); see Toomey v. Toomey, 636 S.W.2d 313, 315 (Mo. banc 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1106 , 103 S.Ct. 730 , 74 L.Ed.2d 955 (1983).
green
Adams v. Burlington Northern Railroad (1993)
See, e.g., Pinhard, v. Pullman-Standard, Div. of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983) (right-to-sue letter as precondition to filing Title VII suit satisfied by receipt of letter while action still pending); Hladki v. Jeffrey’s Consol., Ltd., 652 F.Supp. 388 (E.D.N.Y.1987) (dismissing action under Rule 9(c) for failure to plead or aver compliance with a condition precedent when plaintiff brought Titl…
right-to-sue letter as precondition to filing Title VII suit satisfied by receipt of letter while action still pending
green
James v. Texas Department of Human Services (1993)
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, Div. of Pullman, Inc., 678 F.2d 1211, 1215 (5th Cir.1982) (holding that a right-to-sue letter is not a jurisdictional requirement but rather a condition precedent, which can be fulfilled after filing suit), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
green
May v. May (1990)
See, Toomey v. Toomey, 636 S.W.2d 313, 315-16 (Mo. banc 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1106 , 103 S.Ct. 730 , 74 L.Ed.2d 955 (1983).
green
Graf v. Bacon (1990)
It is no valid objection to the child support provisions of a dissolution decree that it may “require payments by the supporting parent to third parties such as schools, camps, or health care providers.” Niederkorn v. Niederkorn, 616 S.W.2d 529, 539 (Mo.App.1981); see also Toomey v. Toomey, 636 S.W.2d 313, 315 (Mo. banc 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1106 , 103 S.Ct. 730 , 74 L.Ed.2d 955 (1983); Biggs v. Biggs, 397 S.W.2d 337, 342-43 (Mo.App.1965).
green
Williams v. National RR Passenger Corp. (1989)
See, e.g., Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211 , 1229 n. 15 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983).
green
Ying Shen v. Oklahoma State Department of Health (1985)
See e.g., Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211 (5th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1105 , 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983); Jackson v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co., 678 F.2d 992 (11th Cir.1982). *190 Accordingly, the Plaintiffs action is dismissed in its entirety.
green
Thornton v. Chrysler Corp. (1983)
See Pinkard v. Pullman-Standard, 678 F.2d 1211, 1215-19 (5th Cir.1982) (per curiam), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 103 S.Ct. 729 , 74 L.Ed.2d 954 (1983) ; Gordon v. National Youth Work Alliance, 675 F.2d 356, 359-60 (D.C.Cir. 1982); Thomas v. KATV Channel 7, 692 F.2d 548 , 549 n. 2 (8th Cir.1982) (per curiam), ce rt. denied, — U.S. —, 103 S.Ct. 1431 , 75 L.Ed.2d 790 (1983).