Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Alabama opinions name it 1 courts 1980–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Irving Kahn and Minnie Kahngreen2 sentences2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L 1986"The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy." United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev'd on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L.Ed.2d 225 (1974). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Newton P. Van Drunengreen2 sentences2011Van Drunen, 501 F.2d at 1396 . 2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L | 2 | 2 |
| State v. Browdergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Frank Cotroni and Frank Dasti
green
2 sentences2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). 2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). | 4 | 1986–2025 |
United States v. Arturo Reyes Mendoza, June Bunch Mendoza, and Oscar Reyes Mendoza
green
2 sentences2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). 2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). | 4 | 1986–2025 |
Keiley v. Hinkson
green
2 sentences2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). 2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). | 4 | 1986–2025 |
Cotroni v. United States
green
2 sentences2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). 2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). | 4 | 1986–2025 |
Collins v. United States
green
2 sentences2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). 2025App. 1986),4 a case cited in the Advisory Committee's Notes, this Court stated: "In United States v. Mendoza, 574 F.2d 1373 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 584 , 58 L.Ed.2d 661 (1978), the Fifth Circuit examined the policies underlying the confidential communications privilege in conjunction with the exception to the rule established in the Seventh Circuit (which the 5th Circuit viewed as being adopted by the Second Circuit in United States v. Cotroni, 527 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906 , 96 S.Ct. 2226 , 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976)). | 4 | 1986–2025 |
Arnold v. State
green
2 sentences2011In Arnold the Court applied the confidential communications privilege to the facts of that case and determined that the privilege did not bar ‘testimony by one spouse concerning an overheard conversation between the other [spouse] and a third party.’ Id. at 527 . 1986In Arnold the Court applied the confidential communications privilege to the facts of that case and determined that the privilege did not bar "testimony by one spouse concerning an overheard conversation between the other [spouse] and a third party." Id. at 527 . | 3 | 1986–2011 |
Gutridge v. State
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| United States v. Billy Joe Entrekin green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
United States v. Ammar
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Ostric v. Corporation of St. Mary's College
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co.
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) | 2 | 1986–2011 |
United States v. William Augustus Broome, United States of America v. James Lee Spoone, United States of America v. Billie K. Spoone
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
United States v. Judy Ann Archer and Jerry Vaughn Archer
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
United States v. Jake Keller Neal
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
United States v. Nick Kapnison
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Gill v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
United States v. Kahn
green
2 sentences2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L 2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| United States v. Arnold J. Price, Charles R. Mitchell, William Pernar Mitchell, A/K/A Bill Mitchell, and Bobbi Mitchell green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Pennsylvania v. Lopinson
green
2 sentences2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L 1986"The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy." United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev'd on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L.Ed.2d 225 (1974). | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Richardson v. Hamilton International Corp.
green
2 sentences2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L 1986"The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy." United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev'd on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L.Ed.2d 225 (1974). | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Bryant v. Nelson
green
2 sentences2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L 1986"The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy." United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev'd on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L.Ed.2d 225 (1974). | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Agnew v. United States
green
2 sentences2011We held: “The confidential communications privilege is based on the premise of preservation of the family. ‘The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy.’ United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev’d on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L 1986"The privilege for confidential marital communications is thought to do this by encouraging the spouses to be frank and open with each other by protecting marital privacy." United States v. Van Drunen, 501 F.2d 1393, 1396 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1091 , 95 S.Ct. 684 , 42 L.Ed.2d 684 (1974) (citing United States v. Kahn, 471 F.2d 191, 194 (7th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 986 , 93 S.Ct. 2271 , 36 L.Ed.2d 964 (1973), rev'd on other grounds, 415 U.S. 143 , 94 S.Ct. 977 , 39 L.Ed.2d 225 (1974). | 2 | 1986–2011 |
State v. Smith
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
California v. Civil Aeronautics Board
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| Todd v. Associated Credit Bureau Services, Inc. green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Mitchell v. United States
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| Barham v. Welch green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
LoBue v. Nevada ex rel. Department of Highways
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
D'Arc v. D'Arc
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| Sanchez-Colon v. Marsh green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| In re Sekerez green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| Rabauliman v. Territory of Guam green | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Galloway v. Allsbrook
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Bellevue Fire Fighters Local 1604 v. City of Bellevue
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
Ballard v. Virginia
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1015 , 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1086 , 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 861 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 855 , 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 1986United States v. Kapnison, 743 F.2d 1450 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 2017 , 85 L.Ed.2d. 299 (1985); United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 105 S.Ct. 1848 , 85 L.Ed.2d 146 (1985); United States v. Archer, 733 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ 105 S.Ct. 196 , 83 L.Ed.2d. 128 (1984); United States v. Broome, 732 F.2d 363 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S.___, 105 S.Ct. 181 , 83 L.Ed.2d 116 (1984); United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Un | 2 | 1986–2011 |
| Moteles v. University of Pennsylvania green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Smith v. Wyrick green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Lacy v. Gabriel green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| CED'S, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Neal v. United States green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.