Cases pin-citing Califano · Go Syfert
Search » Famous passages » Cases pin-citing Califano

Cases pin-citing Califano

Califano v. Yamasaki  ·  1979  ·  141 pinpoint citations from 48 cases, 40 distinct passages.

Sanhueza v. Saul  ·  2021-09-16  ·  W.D. North Carolina  ·  pin 442 U.S. at 682
“As the Secretary’s regulations make clear, ‘fault’ depends on an evaluation of “all pertinent circumstances” including the recipient’s ‘intelligence . . . and physical and mental condition’ as well as his good faith. 20 CFR § 404.507 (1978).”
GENERAL NUTRITION INVESTMENT COMPANY v. LAUREL SEASON, INC.  ·  2020-08-26  ·  W.D. Pennsylvania  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Injunctive relief should be narrowly tailored to fit specific legal violations.”
Washington v. Azar  ·  2019-04-25  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"[I]njunctive relief generally should be limited to apply only to named plaintiffs where there is no class certification."
City of Philadelphia v. Attorney General United States  ·  2019-02-15  ·  Third Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"Injunctive relief should be narrowly tailored to fit specific legal violations."
New York v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce  ·  2019-01-15  ·  S.D. Illinois  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"[T]he scope of injunctive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established, not by the geographical extent of the plaintiff class."
Willie Ousley v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.  ·  2018-11-21  ·  Sixth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"We do not see how [social security beneficiaries' "fault" or "good faith"] can be evaluated absent personal contact between the recipient and the person who decides his case."
E. Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump  ·  2018-11-19  ·  N.D. California  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"[T]he scope of injunctive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established, not by the geographical extent of the plaintiff."
La Unión Del Pueblo Entero v. Ross  ·  2018-11-09  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction."
Healthy Futures of Texas v. Department of Health and Human Services  ·  2018-06-01  ·  District of Columbia  ·  pin 442 U.S. at 682
“If they had brought a class action back in February or whenever the first case was brought, that wouldn’t have been the issue that we have now. But the fact that they waited . . . is what creates the problem.”
State of Hawaii v. Donald Trump  ·  2017-06-12  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[T]he scope of injunc-tive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established.... ”
County of Santa Clara v. Trump  ·  2017-04-25  ·  N.D. California  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[T]he scope of injunctive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established, not. by the geographical extent of the plaintiff.”
Groupe SEB USA, Inc. v. Euro-Pro Operating LLC  ·  2014-12-17  ·  Third Circuit  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“We conclude that the injunction does not violate the First Amendment ... because each of these messages is false.”
Nancy C. Gazaille v. Robert A. McDonald  ·  2014-12-04  ·  Veterans Claims  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power ... ”
Innovation Ventures, LLC v. N2G Distributing, Inc.  ·  2014-08-14  ·  Sixth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction.”
Antonio Pacheco v. Sloan D. Gibson  ·  2014-07-17  ·  Veterans Claims  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest corhmand to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power ____”
Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Society  ·  2012-03-19  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction.”
Bateman v. American Multi-Cinema, Inc.  ·  2010-09-27  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“In the absence of a direct expression by Congress of its intent to depart from the usual course of trying ‘all suits of civil nature’ under the Rules established for that purpose, class relief is appropriate in civil actions brought in federal court....”
Thomas v. Bryant  ·  2010-08-20  ·  Eleventh Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[T]he scope of injunc *1318 tive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established .... ”
Wilborn v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In Re Wilborn)  ·  2009-03-24  ·  S.D. Texas  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Where the district court has jurisdiction over the claim of each individual member of the *854 class, Rule 23 provides a procedure by which the court may exercise that jurisdiction over the various individual claims in a single proceeding.”
DeKeyser v. Thyssenkrupp Waupaca, Inc.  ·  2008-11-26  ·  E.D. Wisconsin  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“In the absence of a direct expression by Congress of its intent to depart from the usual course of trying ‘all suits of a civil nature’ under the Rules established for that purpose, class relief is appropriate”
Belbacha v. Bush  ·  2008-03-14  ·  D.C. Circuit  ·  6 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction"
Williams v. Boeing Co.  ·  2005-01-21  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“the scope of injunctive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established”
Carhart v. Ashcroft  ·  2004-09-08  ·  D. Nebraska  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[I]njunctive relief should be no more burdensome to the defendant than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs.”
Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Ass'n v. Swift Transportation Co.  ·  2004-05-12  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction.”
Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, Inc. v. Swift Transportation Co., Inc.  ·  2004-05-12  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction."
Vives v. City of New York  ·  2003-11-24  ·  S.D. New York  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[IJnjunctive relief should be no more burdensome to the defendant than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs.”
Abram v. United Parcel Service of America, Inc.  ·  2001-05-10  ·  E.D. Wisconsin  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[M]ost issues arising under Rule 23 ... [are] committed in the first instance to the discretion of the district court”
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation v. Mitsui & Co., Inc. Marubeni America Corporation and Itochu International Inc.  ·  2000-07-25  ·  Sixth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction.”
G & G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. v. Bradshaw  ·  1998-09-10  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[T]he scope of injunctive relief is dictated by the extent of the violation established .... ”
G & G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. v. Bradshaw  ·  1998-02-03  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[T]he scope of injunctive relief is dictated.by the extent of the violation established....”
State of Ga. v. Westlake  ·  1996-06-27  ·  M.D. Georgia  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[I]f ‘a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which [a serious doubt of constitutionality] may be avoided,’ Crowell v. Benson, 285 U.S. 22, 62 , 52 S.Ct. 285, 296 , 76 L.Ed. 598 (1932), a court should adopt that construction.”
United States v. Princeton Gamma-Tech, Inc.  ·  1994-11-01  ·  Third Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions in suits over which they have jurisdiction."
Goodnight v. Shalala  ·  1993-10-27  ·  D. Utah  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“It is unlikely the differences in the factual background of each claim will affect the outcome of the legal issue.”
Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. McCain Foods, Ltd. McCain Foods, Inc.  ·  1991-08-12  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“injunctive relief should be no more burdensome to the defendants than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs”
Antonia Paris v. Department of Housing and Urban Development  ·  1988-05-04  ·  First Circuit  ·  6 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"injunctive relief should be no more burdensome to the defendant than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs"
Rodney BURNETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis BOWEN, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee  ·  1987-09-21  ·  Seventh Circuit  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[W]e do not reach the question whether mandamus would otherwise be available [regarding the Social Security Act]”
Utah State Department of Health v. Ng  ·  1986-11-24  ·  D. Utah  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“Absent the clearest command to the contrary from Congress, federal courts retain their equitable power to issue injunctions over suits in which they have jurisdiction”
Gavin v. Bowen  ·  1986-05-15  ·  N.D. Illinois  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“where provision for recovery and provision for waiver are phrased in equally mandatory terms, it is reasonable to infer that ... Congress did not intend to exalt recovery over waiver”
Ortiz v. Eichler  ·  1985-07-05  ·  D. Delaware  ·  6 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“It is unlikely that differences in the factual background of each claim will affect the outcome of the legal issue.”
United States v. Moore  ·  1985-04-17  ·  N.D. California  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“if ‘a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which [a serious doubt of constitutionality] may be avoided,’ a court should adopt that construction.”
Benitez on Behalf of Catala v. Collazo  ·  1984-04-06  ·  D. Puerto Rico  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“A court presented with both statutory and constitutional grounds to support the relief requested usually should pass on the statutory claim before considering the constitutional question”
City of New York v. Heckler  ·  1984-01-11  ·  E.D. New York  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 442 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“A court presented with both statutory and constitutional grounds to support the relief requested usually should pass on the statutory claim before considering the constitutional question.”
Ringer v. Schweiker  ·  1982-12-30  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"[t]he distinction between due process questions divorced from a claim for benefits and questions relat[ing] to the merits of a benefits claim is a significant one, requiring considerably different treatment by the courts"
Ringer v. Schweiker  ·  1982-08-19  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[t]he distinction between due process questions divorced from a claim for benefits and questions relating] to the merits of a benefits claim is a significant one, requiring considerably different treatment by the courts”
Ringer v. Schweiker  ·  1982-08-19  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
“[t]he distinction between due process questions divorced from a claim for benefits and questions relating] to the merits of a benefits claim is a significant one, requiring considerably different treatment by the courts”
Ringer v. Schweiker  ·  1982-08-19  ·  Ninth Circuit  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 61 L. Ed. 2d at 176
"(t) he distinction between due process questions divorced from a claim for benefits and questions relat(ing) to the merits of a benefits claim is a significant one, requiring considerably different treatment by the courts"
Page 1 of 3   Next →