§Why CasetextPricing

UnitedHealth Group Incorporated v. Hiscox Dedicated Corporate Member Ltd., et al.

RESPONSE TO OBJECTION to 124 Report and Recommendation

34 Cited authorities

  1. Thomas v. Arn

    474 U.S. 140 (1985)   Cited 92,038 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Sixth Circuit's waiver rule is within its supervisory powers

  2. United States v. Raddatz

    447 U.S. 667 (1980)   Cited 7,124 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trial judge's adoption of a magistrate judge's findings related to a suppression hearing does not violate due process "so long as the ultimate decision is made by the district court"

  3. Federal Trade Commission v. Indiana Federation of Dentists

    476 U.S. 447 (1986)   Cited 555 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that deference is due FTC's assessment of business practices

  4. Leibowitz v. Cornell Univ.

    584 F.3d 487 (2d Cir. 2009)   Cited 760 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding inference of discriminatory intent could be drawn where plaintiff and several other women over fifty were laid off, and plaintiff's responsibilities were transferred to male employees, and she was not considered for open positions

  5. Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society

    457 U.S. 332 (1982)   Cited 472 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that price fixing between medical organizations is per se unreasonable

  6. Todd v. Exxon Corp.

    275 F.3d 191 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 551 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding employees’ allegations of information exchanges and oligopsonistic market sufficient to state claim of wage suppression conspiracy

  7. Kowalchuk v. Stroup

    61 A.D.3d 118 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 236 times
    Holding that a contract was formed where one party sent an offer via email

  8. U.S. v. George

    971 F.2d 1113 (4th Cir. 1992)   Cited 331 times
    Holding that "as part of its obligation to determine de novo any issue to which proper objection is made, a district court is required to consider all arguments directed to that issue, regardless of whether they were raised before the magistrate."

  9. Knevelbaard Dairies v. Kraft Foods, Inc.

    232 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 217 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a conspiracy to manipulate the benchmark for bulk cheese auction prices, which were then used to determine the government-mandated minimum price for milk, caused antitrust injury to milk buyers

  10. Stephens v. Tolbert

    471 F.3d 1173 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 160 times
    Holding that the district court has discretion to hear an argument not presented to the magistrate judge

  11. Section 636 - Jurisdiction, powers, and temporary assignment

    28 U.S.C. § 636   Cited 503,714 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when a party fails to object to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, our review of the district court's resulting decision is for plain error so long as the party "has been served with notice that [this consequence] will result from a failure to object"

  12. Section 362 - Automatic stay

    11 U.S.C. § 362   Cited 29,510 times   175 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that cause exists to lift the stay because no bankruptcy purpose would be served by keeping the stay in place

  13. Section 3001 - Declaratory judgment

    N.Y. CPLR 3001   Cited 1,787 times
    Considering declaratory judgment actions

  14. Section 63 - [Effective 7/19/2024] General duties

    N.Y. Exec. Law § 63   Cited 771 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Specifying that in such circumstances the Attorney General or her deputy will exercise the powers the district attorney “would otherwise” hold, and the district attorney is limited to “exercise[ing] such powers . . . as are required of him by the attorney-general or the deputy attorney-general so attending”