UNITED STATES

v.

CITIZENS & SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Citizens & S. Nat'l Bank, 422 U.S. 86 (U.S. 1975)
  …ppellees here — are C&S National, C&S Holding, six of the 5-percent banks, and two banks in the Atlanta area, C&S Emory and C&S East Point, which are subsidiaries of C&S Holding. Taken together, these will sometimes be called the “defendant banks.” 419 U. S. 893. Notice of appeal was filed prior to the effective date of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, Pub. L. 93-528, § 7, 88 Stat. 1710. The proposed acquisitions were stayed automatically by the filing of the suit, 12 U. S. C. § 1828 (c) (7) (A).…
• Jo-Ann Evans Gardner v. Westinghouse Broad. Co., 559 F.2d 209 (3d Cir. 1977)
  …rt’s refusal to certify after she had obtained the individual relief she has requested, the court’s refusal to [*215] certify could have the effect of reducing the ultimate scope of injunctive relief. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Sosna v. Iowa, 419 U.S. 893, 95 S.Ct. 553, 42 L.Ed.2d 532 (1975) and Board of School Comm’rs v. Jacobs, 420 U.S. 128, 95 S.Ct. 848, 43 L.Ed.2d 74 (1975) provide some guidance as to whether Ms. Gardner would have standing. Sosna involved the constitutionality of Iowa’s requirem…