green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
7.6 score
G Cite
cited 4× by 2 distinct cases ·
"[A]lthough it is alleged that the officers made statements under the threat of job loss, these statements were not used against them in any criminal proceeding."
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“Although it is alleged that the officers made statements under the threat of job loss, these statements were not used against them in any criminal proceeding.”
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
"GM Truck"
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“In re G.M. Corp.”
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
McKinley v. Mansfield
lthough it is alleged that the officers made statements under the threat of job loss, these statements were not used against them in any criminal proceeding.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Jeffrey McKinley v. City of Mansfield
(2×)
although it is alleged that the officers made statements under the threat of job loss, these statements were not used against them in any criminal proceeding.
cited
Cited "see"
John Doe v. Joan Delie
See In Re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Litig., 55 F.3d 768, 784 (3d Cir.) cert. denied, General Motors v. French, 516 U.S. 824 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Doe v. Delie
(2×)
See In Re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Litig., 55 F.3d 768, 784 (3d Cir.) cert. denied, General Motors v. French, 516 U.S. 824 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re: General Motors Corporation Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation Jack French, Robert M. West, Charles E. Merrit and Gary Blades (The French Objectors/movants), in No. 96-2039, Jesus Garibay, Jerome Hope, Jr., Robert and Lucille White, and Carlos Zabala, Pending Intervenors, Objectors and Class Members, in No. 96-2054, Dan Tureck and Joseph Geller, in No. 96-2061
See General Motors Corp. v. French, 516 U.S. 824 , 116 S.Ct. 88 , 133 L.Ed.2d 45 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation
See General Motors Corp. v. French, 516 U.S. 824 , 116 S.Ct. 88 , 133 L.Ed.2d 45 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Sprint Communications Co., LP
See also In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation, 55 F.3d 768, 800 (3 Cir.1995), cert. denied sub nom., General Motors Corp. v. French, 516 U.S. 824 , 116 S.Ct. 88 , 133 L.Ed.2d 45 (1995), holding that settlement class certification must meet essentially the same requirements as litigation class certification, and a court's failure to conduct such a review is a plain error of law, and hence an abuse of discretion, requiring that certification be set aside.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gillespie v. Scherr
(2×)
See, e.g., In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank, 55 F.3d 768, 801 (3 rd Cir.1995) (stating that class attorneys owe the entire class a fiduciary duty once the class complaint is filed), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 824 , 116 S.Ct. 88 , 133 L.Ed.2d 45 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Bausch & Lomb, Inc. Securities Litigation
Compare In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation, 55 F.3d 768, 822 (3d Cir.) (district court erred in applying multiplier for contingent nature of success in class action products liability case, given Supreme Court’s rejection of such multipliers in Dague ), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 824 , 116 S.Ct. 88 , 133 L.Ed.2d 45 (1995); Nensel v. Peoples Heritage Fin.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Marshall
See, e.g., Wiley v. Doory, 14 F.3d 993 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 824 , 116 S.Ct. 89 , 133 L.Ed.2d 45 (1994).
George
v.
Casale
v.
Casale
No. 94-2127.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 2, 1995.
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.