ADAMS

v.

MINNESOTA

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• In re McDONALD, 489 U.S. 180 (U.S. 1989)
  …1979); McDonald v. United States District Court and McDonald v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc., 444 U. S. 875 (1979); McDonald v. Thompson, 436 U. S. 911 (1978); McDonald v. Tennessee, 434 U. S. 866 (1977); McDonald v. Davidson County Election Comm’n, 431 U. S. 958 (1977); McDonald v. Tennessee, 431 U. S. 933 (1977); McDonald v. Tennessee, 429 U. S. 1064 (1977); McDonald v. Tennessee, 425 U. S. 955 (1976); McDonald v. Tennessee, 423 U. S. 991 (1975); McDonald v. Tennessee, 416 U. S. 975 (1974); McDonald v. Ten…
• Cooper v. Griffin B. Bell, 628 F.2d 1208 (9th Cir. 1980)
  …New York v. Cotten, 427 F. 2d 48, 51 (9th Cir. 1970). If the filing period is instead equivalent to a statute of limitation, extension might be available in appropriate cases. See Alley v. Dodge Hotel, 551 F. 2d 442, 445-47 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 958, 97 S.Ct. 2684, 53 L.Ed.2d 277 (1977); 65 Geo.L.J. 147, 155-65 (1976) (discussing the distinction between jurisdictional prerequisites and statutes of limitations). The emerging consensus among the circuit courts seems to be that Title VII filing p…
• In re Claus von Bulow v. Claus von Bulow, 828 F.2d 94 (2d Cir. 1987)
  …y client). A client may nonetheless by his actions impliedly waive the privilege or consent to disclosure. See United States ex rel Edney v. Smith, 425 F.Supp. 1038,1052 (E.D.N.Y.1976) (implied waiver), aff'd, 556 F. 2d 556 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 958, 97 S.Ct. 2683, 53 L.Ed.2d 276 (1977); Drimmer v. Appleton, 628 F.Supp. 1249, 1252 (S.D.N.Y.1986) (implied consent); Wigmore, supra, § 2327. And an attorney may, in appropriate circumstances, possess “an implied authority to waive the privilege on b…