OMNI CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL, LTD., ET AL.

v.

RUDOLF WOLFF & CO., LTD., ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• Taylor v. Illinois, 484 U.S. 400 (U.S. 1988)
  …hat in this case “the trial court was within its discretion in refusing to allow the additional witnesses to testify.” Id., at 844-845, 491 N. E. 2d, at 7. The Illinois Supreme Court denied leave to appeal and we granted the petition for certiorari, 479 U. S. 1063 (1987). In this Court petitioner makes two arguments. He first contends that the Sixth Amendment bars a court from ever ordering the preclusion of defense evidence as a sanction for violating a discovery rule. Alternatively, he contends that even i…
• Wilder v. Va. Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498 (U.S. 1990)
  …niversity Hospitals, Inc. v. Casey, 885 F. 2d 11, 17-22 (CA3 1989), cert. granted, 494 U. S. 1003 (1990); Coos Bay Care Center, 803 F. 2d, at 1061-1063; Nebraska Health Care Assn., Inc. v. Dunning, 778 F. 2d 1291, 1295-1297 (CA8 1985), cert. denied, 479 U. S. 1063 (1987). Other courts have entertained such claims without separately considering whether the providers had a cause of action under § 1983. See Hoodkroft Convalescent Center, Inc. v. New Hampshire Division of Human Services, 879 F. 2d 968, 972-975…
• Deakins v. Monaghan, 484 U.S. 193 (U.S. 1988)
  …roceedings. 798 F. 2d 632, 635 (CA3 1986). Second, the Court of Appeals held that a state grand jury investigation is not the kind of proceeding that calls for abstention under Younger. 798 F. 2d, at 636-638. We granted certiorari on both questions. 479 U. S. 1063 (1987). I agree with the Court that the issue of Younger1 s applicability to state grand jury proceedings is moot, and that the judgments of the Court of Appeals and the District Court must be vacated insofar as they dealt with that question. I con…

  ← 1 / 2 →