Topic: considering an argument advanced for the first time in a re… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #28886

4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 13 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from William G. McBride v. Merrell Dow and Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an Ohio Corporation.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 William G. McBride v. Merrell Dow and Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an Ohio Corporation Anchor
cadc · 1986
green “considering an argument advanced for the first time in a reply brief ... is not only unfair to a defendant, but also entails the risk of an improvident or ill-advised opinion on the legal issues tendered.” 4
2 Blackmon-Malloy v. United States Capitol Police Board
cadc · 2009
green “congress extended the protections of title vii of the civil rights act of 1964, as well as ten other remedial federal statutes, to employees of the legislative branch” 3
3 Newton v. Office of the Architect of the Capitol
dcd · 2012
green “suggests judicial, not board, primacy by providing that courts, rather than the board, shall (if necessary) have the final word on all complaints.” 3
4 Moran v. United States Capitol Police Board
dcd · 2012
green “although the caa contains its own retaliation provision, courts refer to the body of case law regarding discrimination under title vii to evaluate claims of retaliation under the caa.” 3

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check