DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ET AL.

v.

WISCONSIN EX REL. LA FOLLETTE ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Democratic Party of United States v. Wisconsin ex rel. LA Follette, 450 U.S. 107 (U.S. 1981)
  …State Party chose delegates to the 1980 Democratic National Convention, in compliance with the order of the Wisconsin Supreme Court and Wis. Stat. §§ 8.12 (3)(b), (3)(c) 5 (1977). This Court noted probable jurisdiction of the appeal on July 2, 1980. 448 U. S. 909. On the same day, the Court stayed the judgment of [*115] the Wisconsin Supreme Court. On July 20, 1980, the Credentials Committee of the National Convention decided to seat the delegates from Wisconsin, despite this Court’s stay,12 and despite the…
• United Steelworkers OF Am. v. Marshall, 647 F.2d 1189 (D.C. Cir. 1980)
  …tation 1. The meaning of feasibility. The judicial history at least establishes clearly that there are two types of feasibility — technological and economic. American Iron & Steel Institute v. OSHA, 577 F. 2d 825, 832 (3d Cir. 1978), cert. granted, 448 U.S. 909, 100 S.Ct. 3054, 65 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1980).104 And the cases in this circuit and other circuits generate some useful criteria for measuring both technological and economic feasibility. But the factual complexity of the record in this case demands that…

  ← 1 / 4 →
• In re Chicago, 658 F.2d 1149 (7th Cir. 1981)
  …p. Ill 1979) . . In the event of Milwaukee liquidation, employees might not receive any labor benefits whatsoever. See RLEA v. Gibbons, 448 U.S. 1301-05, 100 S.Ct. 2668, 2671, 65 L.Ed.2d 1094 (Stevens, Circuit Justice 1980), stay denied per curiam, 448 U.S. 909, 100 S.Ct. 3057, 65 L.Ed.2d 1140 (1980), cert. granted,-U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 2014, 68 L.Ed.2d 322 (1981); Matter of New York, Susquehanna & Western Railroad Co., 504 F.Supp. 851, 859-63 (D.N.J. 1980) . See also North Hampton & Bath Railroad Co.-Abandon…