How cited: Statewide Reapportionment Advisory Committee v. Beasley · Go Syfert

Statewide Reapportionment Advisory Committee v. Beasley (1997)

green · 29 citation events across 13 courts. Showing the 9 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199720112026
Quote Authority · 6th Cir. · signal: see also
See also Tyus v. Schoemehl, 93 F.3d 449, 454 (8th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1427 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997) ("Because of the fact-intensive nature of these inquiries, there is no clear test that can be employed to determine if virtual representation is appropriate."). 21 "Virtual representation" is said by some scholars to be a useful tool for broadening the finality of judgments and enhancing the efficient administration of justice.
"Because of the fact-intensive nature of these inquiries, there is no clear test that can be employed to determine if virtual representation is appropriate."
Quote Authority · Mass. · signal: see
See Fogie v. Thom Americas, Inc., 95 F.3d 645 (8th Cir. 1996), cert, denied, 520 U.S. 1166 (1997); Miller v. Colortyme, Inc., 518 N.W.2d 544 (Minn. 1994) (“By defining certain terminable leases as ‘sales’ within the [Consumer Credit Sales Act], the legislature has made clear its intent to subject these terminable leases to the same consumer protection laws as ordinary credit sales”).
“By defining certain terminable leases as ‘sales’ within the [Consumer Credit Sales Act], the legislature has made clear its intent to subject these terminable leases to the same consumer protection laws as ordinary credit sales”
Cited (see also) · 8th Cir. · signal: see also
The doctrine of issue preclusion holds that “once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision may preclude relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case.” Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94 , 101 S.Ct. 411 , 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980); see also Tyus v. Schoemehl, 93 F.3d 449, 453 (8th Cir.1996) (listing requirements for preclusion to apply), ce rt. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 14
Cited · 3rd Cir. · signal: see
See Brock v. Caterpillar, Inc., 94 F.3d 220, 224 (6th Cir.1996), cert. denied 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1428 , 137 L.Ed.2d 537 (1997); see also Montgomery Elevator Co. v. McCullough, 676 S.W.2d 776, 783 (Ky.1984).
Cited (see also) · Ala. · signal: see also · 2 citations in this opinion
Tea Co., 790 F.2d 894 , 899 (3d Cir.1986), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 904 , 108 S.Ct. 1074 , 99 L.Ed.2d 233 (1988); see also Tyus v. Schoemehl, 93 F.3d 449, 455 (8th Cir.1996) (court will apply virtual representation only when existence of special relationship between parties justifies preclusion), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1427 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997); Becherer v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 43 F.3d 1054, 1070 (6th Cir.) (virtual representation d…
Cited · N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. · signal: see
See Fogie v. THORN Americas, Inc., 95 F.3d 645, 648, 650-654 (8th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1427 , 137 L.Ed. 2d 536 (1997); Miller v. Colortyme, Inc., 518 N.W. 2d 544, 547-551 (Minn.1994).
Cited (see also) · D. Kan. · signal: see also
Tea Co., 790 F.2d 894 , 899 (3d Cir.1986), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 904 , 108 S.Ct. 1074 , 99 L.Ed.2d 233 (1988); see also Tyus v. Schoemehl, 93 F.3d 449, 455 (8th Cir.1996) (court will apply virtual representation only when existence of special relationship between parties justifies preclusion), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1427 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997); Becherer v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 43 F.3d 1054, 1070 (6th Cir.) (virtual representation d…
Cited (see also) · D. Kan. · signal: see also
Tea Co., 790 F.2d 894 , 899 (3d Cir.1986), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 904 , 108 S.Ct. 1074 , 99 L.Ed.2d 233 (1988); see also Tyus v. Schoemehl, 93 F.3d 449, 455 (8th Cir.1996) (court will apply virtual representation only when existence of special relationship between parties justifies preclusion), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1427 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997); Becherer v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 43 F.3d 1054, 1070 (6th Cir.) (virtual representation d…
Cited (see also) · D. Kan. · signal: see also
Tea Co., 790 F.2d 894 , 899 (3d Cir.1986), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 904 , 108 S.Ct. 1074 , 99 L.Ed.2d 233 (1988); see also Tyus v. Schoemehl, 93 F.3d 449, 455 (8th Cir.1996) (“A court will apply virtual representation only when it finds the existence of some special relationship between the parties justifying preclusion.”), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166 , 117 S.Ct. 1427 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997); Becherer v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 43 F.3d 1054, 1070 (6th Cir…