§Why CasetextPricing

Ranger Offshore Mexico, S. De R.L. De C.V. v. Grupo Tradeco, S.A. de C.V. et al

REPLY to Response to 5 MOTION Order of Special Process Server of Maritime Attachment and Garnishment

17 Cited authorities

  1. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,832 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  2. Linda R. S. v. Richard D

    410 U.S. 614 (1973)   Cited 3,558 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a mother lacked standing to seek an injunction to force the prosecution of her child’s father for failing to pay child support, reasoning that because prosecution would result only in the father being jailed, it was overly "speculative" whether an injunction would result in future child support payments

  3. Welch v. Texas Highways Public Transp. Dept

    483 U.S. 468 (1987)   Cited 877 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Jones Act does not abrogate the States' Eleventh Amendment immunity

  4. United States v. Procter Gamble

    356 U.S. 677 (1958)   Cited 1,676 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, although Government suggested dismissal as a sanction for its refusal to comply with a challenged court order, Government could challenge that underlying order in ensuing appeal of dismissal

  5. Swift Co. v. Compania Caribe

    339 U.S. 684 (1950)   Cited 343 times
    Holding that an order vacating an attachment is appealable as a collateral order

  6. Texas v. U.S.

    497 F.3d 491 (5th Cir. 2007)   Cited 135 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court decisions subsequent to the enactment of a statute cannot have an effect on statutory ambiguity; a statute's ambiguity is set when it is enacted and when statutes are subsequently added or amended, altering the statutory scheme in which the statute at issue sits

  7. Barnes v. Black

    544 F.3d 807 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 32 times
    Holding that "the federal courts have an interest in being able to get hold of prisoners to testify in cases before those courts that transcends the categories of prisoner and criminal cases."

  8. In re Missouri Department of Natural Resources

    105 F.3d 434 (8th Cir. 1997)   Cited 34 times
    Discussing discovery requested from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, a non-party, holding that "[g]overnmental units are subject to the same discovery rules as other persons and entities having contact with the federal courts"

  9. Harris County v. Walsweer

    930 S.W.2d 659 (Tex. App. 1996)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that a constable is both a precinct officer and a county officer

  10. Ali v. Carnegie Inst. Washington

    306 F.R.D. 20 (D.D.C. 2014)   Cited 7 times

    [Copyrighted Material Omitted] For MUSSA ALI, Plaintiff: Joseph William Berenato, III , LEAD ATTORNEY, BERENATO & WHITE, LLC, Bethesda, MD. For CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON, Defendant: Kurt G. Calia, LEAD ATTORNEY, COVINGTON & BURLING, Washington, DC; Kelly Mansfield Diephuis, JASKE LAW LLC, Portland, OR; Paul J. Berman, Philip A. Scarborough, COVINGTON & BURLING LLP, Washington, DC. For UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, Defendant: Kurt G. Calia, LEAD ATTORNEY, COVINGTON & BURLING, Washington, DC;

  11. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,032 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

  12. Section Amendment XI - Suits Against States

    U.S. Const. amend. XI   Cited 5,964 times
    Granting states immunity from cases "against one of the United States"