green
Positive treatment
4.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Certain Underwriters at Interest v. United Parcel Service of America, Inc.
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988) (denying petition for writ of certiorari requesting review of the Seventh Circuit’s holding that the Carmack Amendment bars a shipper from pursuing state and common law remedies against a carrier for damages to goods shipped in interstate commerce); New York, New Haven & Hartford R.R.
discussed
Cited "see"
Reeves v. Mayflower Transit, Inc.
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, Inc., 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988) (J.
discussed
Cited "see"
Potomac Design, Inc. v. Eurocal Trading, Inc.
See generally Clark-Cowlitz Joint Operating Agency v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 826 F.2d 1074 , 1080, (D.C.Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 *367 (1988) ("Issue preclusion ... attaches only to such issues as the parties litigated adversely to each other in the prior litigation.”); Franklin Stainless Corp. v. Mario Transport Corp., 748 F.2d 865, 867 (4th Cir.1984) ("An element of collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, is actual, full, and fair litigation between the parties, especially when they previously were aligned on the same side of an ac…
discussed
Cited "see"
Burnell v. Butler Moving & Storage
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, Inc., 829 F.2d 1407 (7th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988); see also Hughes Aircraft v. North American Van Lines, 970 F.2d 609 (9th Cir. 1992); Rohner Gehrig Co., Inc. v. Tri-State Motor Transit, 950 F.2d 1079 (5th Cir.1992) (en banc); Carmana Designs, Ltd. v. North American Van Lines, Inc., 943 F.2d 316 (3d Cir.1991); and Anton v. Greyhound Van Lines, Inc., 591 F.2d 103 (1st Cir.1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tokio Marine And Fire Insurance Company, Limited v. Amato Motors, Incorporated
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, 829 F.2d 1407, 1415 (7th Cir.1987) (holding that the remedy provision of the Carmack Amendment "preempts all state and common law remedies inconsistent with the Interstate Commerce Act"), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988)
discussed
Cited "see"
Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance v. Amato Motors, Inc.
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, 829 F.2d 1407, 1415 (7th Cir.1987) (holding that the remedy provision of the Carmack Amendment “preempts all state and common law remedies inconsistent with the Interstate Commerce Act”), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Delahanty v. Hinckley
See Clark-Cowlitz Joint Operating Agency v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 264 U.S.App.D.C. 58 , 826 F.2d 1074, 1079 (1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rohner Gehrig Company, Inc. v. Tri-State Motor Transit
(2×)
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, Inc., 829 F.2d 1407 (7th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gluckstern v. Sutton
See n. 14, supra. [24] As we recently pointed out in Anderson v. Dep't of Health & Mental Hyg., 310 Md. 217, 225-226 , 528 A.2d 904 (1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988), however, "a change in the law which is deemed `procedural' is not necessarily exempt from the ex post facto prohibition if the change affects substantial rights.
cited
Cited "see"
A.T. Clayton & Co., Inc. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company
See Hughes v. United Van Lines, Inc., 829 F.2d 1407, 1415 (7th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harrison-Solomon v. State
See also Anderson v. Dep’t of Health & Mental Hygiene, 310 Md. 217, 222 , 528 A.2d 904 (1987) (commitment “continues indefinitely until the criminal defendant prevails at an administrative proceeding or a judicial release hearing or obtains a writ of habeas corpus”), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988). 8 Section 3-122, the statute at issue here, addresses a request for a change in conditional release, as follows: *149 (a) In general.—(1) An application to the court for a change in conditional release of a committed person may be made by: (1) [DHMH] or t…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
U.S. Sugar Co., Inc. v. American Sweeteners, Inc.
See also Hughes v. United Van Lines, Inc., 829 F.2d 1407, 1415 (7th Cir.1987) (statute’s purpose is to “establish uniform federal guidelines designed in part to remove the uncertainty surrounding a carrier’s liability when damage occurs to a shipper’s interstate shipment.”), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1068 , 99 L.Ed.2d 248 (1988). ¶ 9 U.S. Sugar concedes that the Carmack Amendment sets forth the rights and liabilities of the parties to the contract of carriage, i.e., the bill of lading.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Steen v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
See, e.g., Clark-Cowlitz Joint Operating Agency v. Federal Energy Reg. Comm’n, 826 F.2d 1074 , 1080 (D.C.Cir.1987) (holding that “[ijssue preclusion ... attaches only to such issues as the parties litigated adversely to each other in the prior litigation.”), cer t. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988); see also Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 38 (1982) (“Parties who are not adversaries to each other under the pleadings in an action involving them and a third party are bound by and entitled to the benefits of issue preclusion with respect to issues they act…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
American Telephone And Telegraph Company v. Federal Communications Commission
The Commission applied the five factor test we have used to determine whether new law developed by an agency in adjudication should be applied retroactively, see Retail, Wholesale & Dep't Store Union v. NLRB, 466 F.2d 380, 390 (D.C.Cir.1972); see also Clark-Cowlitz Joint Operating Agency v. FERC, 826 F.2d 1074 , 1081 (D.C.Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988), and decided the answer to the hypothetical question in this case was no.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
The Commission applied the five factor test we have used to determine whether new law developed by an agency in adjudication should be applied retroactively, see Retail, Wholesale & Dep’t Store Union v. NLRB, 466 F.2d 380, 390 (D.C.Cir.1972); see also Clark-Cowlitz Joint Operating Agency v. FERC, 826 F.2d 1074 , 1081 (D.C.Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988), and decided the answer to the hypothetical question in this case was no.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hinckley
See, e.g., Anderson v. Dep’t of Health & Mental Hygiene, 310 Md. 217 , 528 A.2d 904, 907-11 (1987) (nature of insanity acquittee’s confinement and the process by which it is rendered implicate ex post facto prohibition), ce rt. denied, 485 U.S. 913 , 108 S.Ct. 1088 , 99 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988).
Maryland
v.
Anderson
v.
Anderson
No. 87-699.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 29, 1988.
485 U.S. 913
Cited by 6 opinions | Published
Ct. App. Md. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.