IN RE SHEMONSKY

Citator

Cited By

• Aurelio O. Gonzalez v. Sec'y FOR THE Dep't OF Corr., 366 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2004)
  …1096 (11th Cir.2002). The panel majority believed that in denying Mobley’s Rule 60(b) motion the district court had correctly interpreted our prior Felker decision, but anticipated that the Supreme Court would soon decide in Abdur’Rahman v. Bell, 535 U.S. 1016, 122 S.Ct. 1605, 152 L.Ed.2d 620 (2002) (mem.) (granting certiorari on April 22, 2002), whether all Rule 60(b) motions are subject to the restrictions applicable to second or successive petitions. Wanting the benefit of the upcoming decision in Abdu…
• Scheidler v. Nat'l Org. for Women, Inc., 537 U.S. 393 (U.S. 2003)
  …tates v. Stillo, 57 F. 3d 553, 559 (CA7 1995)). Finally, the Court of Appeals upheld the issuance of the nationwide injunction, finding that private plaintiffs are entitled to obtain injunctive relief under § 1964(c) of RICO. We granted certiorari, 535 U. S. 1016 (2002), and now reverse. We first address the question whether petitioners’ actions constituted extortion in violation of the Hobbs Act. That Act defines extortion as “the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongfiil u…
• United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, 537 U.S. 465 (U.S. 2003)
  …he property, insufficient to support even a common law action for permissive waste. 249 F. 3d 1364, 1384 (2001). We granted certiorari to decide whether the 1960 Act gives rise to jurisdiction over suits for money damages against the United States, 535 U. S. 1016 (2002), and now affirm. [*472] II A Jurisdiction over any suit against the Government requires a clear statement from the United States waiving sovereign immunity, Mitchell I, supra, at 538-539, together with a claim falling within the terms of th…