ALFORD

v.

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; MORTON V. STYNCHCOMBE, SHERIFF, ET AL.; ROSADO ET AL. V. CIVILETTI, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL.; THIESS V. FRANKLIN SQUARE HOSPITAL, INC., ET AL.; RUCKER V. FICKAS ET AL.; CLUGSTON ET AL. V. MICHIGAN ET AL.; SMITH V. ASSIGNMENT OFFICE OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ET AL.; PREJEAN V. LOUISIANA; HUNTER V. WAINWRIGHT, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF OFFENDER REHABILITATION OF FLORIDA; MARATTY V. KENTUCKY; GREEN V. BARTHOLOMEW ET AL.; HYNNING V. DUFIEF MORTGAGE, INC., ET AL.; DUAL MANUFACTURING & ENGINEERING, INC., ET AL. V. BURRIS INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL., IN RE CHESTNUTT MANAGEMENT CORP., JOHNSTON V. UNITED STATES ET AL.; JOHNS V. NANAWALE COMMUNITY ASSN. ET AL.; NEWBOLD V. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ET AL.; QUINONES V. TEXAS; CLAY, ADMINISTRATOR V. HALL ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Structural Rubber Prods. Co. v. Park Rubber Co. & Int'l Metals & Machs., Inc., 749 F.2d 707 (Fed. Cir. 1984)
  …ure: Civil, § 2558 (1971) and cases cited therein, particularly, Dual Mfg. & Engineering, Inc. v. Burris Industries, Inc., 619 F. 2d 660, 663, 205 USPQ 1157, 1160-61 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 870, 101 S.Ct. 208, 66 L.Ed.2d 90, reh’g denied, 449 U.S. 1027, 101 S.Ct. 599, 66 L.Ed.2d 490 (1980) for analysis of Fed.R.Civ.P. 51 waiver. As succinctly stated in Wright, Law of Federal Courts, § 95, at 635 (4th Ed.1983): “[T]he trial judge does not sit to approve miscarriages of justice.” In view of the abs…
• Parts & Elec. Motors, Inc. v. Sterling Elec., Inc., 826 F.2d 712 (7th Cir. 1987)
  …ved its objection to Instruction 28a, the court was still permitted under Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) to grant Sterling’s motion for judgment n.o.v. Relying on Dual Mfg. & Eng’g, Inc., v. Burris Indus., Inc., 619 F. 2d 660 (7th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1027, 101 S.Ct. 208, 66 L.Ed.2d 90 (1980), the district court found that in reviewing its denial of Sterling’s directed verdict motion in connection with the judgment n.o.v., it was governed by the law properly applicable to the case, rather than what th…
• David v. Attorney General OF the United States, 699 F.2d 411 (7th Cir. 1983)
  …36 F. 2d 478 (2d Cir.), cert. den. 429 U.S. 833, 97 S.Ct. 97, 50 L.Ed.2d 98, reh. den. 429 U.S. 988, 97 S.Ct. 511, 50 L.Ed.2d 600 (1976); Rosado v. Civiletti, 621 F. 2d 1179 (2d Cir.), cert. den. 449 U.S. 856, 101 S.Ct. 153, 66 L.Ed.2d 70, reh. den. 449 U.S. 1027, 101 S.Ct. 597, 66 L.Ed.2d 489 (1980). Therefore, we conclude that the Toscanino defense is unavailable to the petitioner in this case. Petitioner contends that Judge Foreman’s refusal to continue the extradition hearing violated his constitutiona…