SIWA
v.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; MAURICIO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; DE JESUS V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; DANAO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; NAVARRO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; TILLO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; SCOTT V. CALIFORNIA; MCQUEEN V. HAYES ET AL.; WHITE V. ZIMMERS, CLERK, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF OHIO, MONTGOMERY COUNTY; BALELE V. KLAUSER, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, ET AL.; TINSLEY V. METHODIST HOSPITAL OF INDIANA; BECKER V. UNITED STATES; SUSSMAN V. NEW YORK
SIWA
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; MAURICIO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; DE JESUS V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; DANAO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; NAVARRO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; TILLO V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; SCOTT V. CALIFORNIA; MCQUEEN V. HAYES ET AL.; WHITE V. ZIMMERS, CLERK, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF OHIO, MONTGOMERY COUNTY; BALELE V. KLAUSER, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, ET AL.; TINSLEY V. METHODIST HOSPITAL OF INDIANA; BECKER V. UNITED STATES; SUSSMAN V. NEW YORK
518 U.S. 1028
Supreme Court of the United States (1996)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Guerra, 164 F.3d 1358 (11th Cir. 1999)…s v. Harrington, 108 F. 3d 1460, 1465 (D.C.Cir.1997); United States v. Atcheson, 94 F. 3d 1237, 1242 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 1096, 137 L.Ed.2d 229 (1997); United States v. Farmer, 73 F. 3d 836, 843 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1028, 116 S.Ct. 2570, 135 L.Ed.2d 1086 (1996); United States v. Bolton, 68 F. 3d 396, 399 (10th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1137, 116 S.Ct. 966, 133 L.Ed.2d 887 (1996); United States v. Stillo, 57 F. 3d 553, 558 n. 2 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U…
-
United States v. Freddy Paredes, 139 F.3d 840 (11th Cir. 1998)…States v. Bolton, 68 F. 3d 396, 399 (10th Cir.1995); United States v. Stillo, 57 F. 3d 553, 558 n. 2 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1137, 116 S.Ct. 966, 133 L.Ed.2d 887 (1996); United States v. Farmer, 73 F. 3d 836, 843 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1028, 116 S.Ct. 2570, 135 L.Ed.2d 1086 (1996)). The Fifth Circuit has also addressed the question and has explained its position that if the Hobbs Act charge is based on purely local activity, the government need not prove that the individual defendant’…