Rowland v. California Men's Colony
506 U.S. 194 (1993) Cited 3,348 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that the rule that corporations must be represented by licensed counsel "applies equally to all artificial entities"
Powers v. Ohio
499 U.S. 400 (1991) Cited 2,581 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that a white defendant has standing to challenge strikes of black jurors
Flast v. Cohen
392 U.S. 83 (1968) Cited 3,173 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that taxpayers have an adequate stake in the outcome of Establishment Clause litigation to satisfy Article III standing requirements, after stating that "[o]ur history vividly illustrates that one of the specific evils feared by those who drafted the Establishment Clause and fought for its adoption was that the taxing and spending power would be used to favor one religion over another or to support religion in general"
Kleissler v. United States Forest Service
157 F.3d 964 (3d Cir. 1998) Cited 187 timesHolding that timber companies had an interest in a lawsuit aimed at changing their methods of timber-cutting
Mausolf v. Babbitt
85 F.3d 1295 (8th Cir. 1996) Cited 144 timesHolding that Article III standing is necessary for intervention
U.S. v. Cocivera
104 F.3d 566 (3d Cir. 1996) Cited 117 times 1 Legal AnalysesFinding the issue more appropriate for collateral attack
Jacobs v. Patent Enforcement Fund, Inc.
230 F.3d 565 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 102 timesFinding that plaintiffs had failed to aver jurisdiction where “they had alleged only the residence, and not the citizenship (or domicile), of the parties”
Benjamin ex rel. Yock v. Dep't of Pub. Welfare of Pa.
701 F.3d 938 (3d Cir. 2012) Cited 70 timesNoting that a "proposed intervenor need not possess an interest in each and every aspect of the litigation" and "[is] entitled to intervene as to specific issues so long as their interest in those issues is significantly protectable"
Hoots v. Pennsylvania
672 F.2d 1133 (3d Cir. 1982) Cited 85 timesHolding that although intervention as of right does not automatically mandate denial of permissive intervention, where the interests of the applicant for permissive intervention, in every manner, match those of an existing party and the party's representation is deemed adequate, the district court is well within its discretion in deciding that the applicant's contributions to the proceedings would be superfluous
Quality Ready Mix, Inc. v. Mamone
35 Ohio St. 3d 224 (Ohio 1988) Cited 43 timesRuling that prior judgment on rights pertaining to real property did not bar subsequent action relating to the same property because "the obligations sought to be enforced by the two actions are separate and distinct"
Section 1915 - Proceedings in forma pauperis
28 U.S.C. § 1915 Cited 300,019 times 38 Legal AnalysesHolding that, after a plaintiff is granted in forma pauperis status, "the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted"
Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 Cited 50,778 times 24 Legal AnalysesHolding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."
Section 1704 - Marriage between persons of the same sex
23 Pa. C.S. § 1704 Cited 19 timesDefining marriage in Pennsylvania as a civil contract between one man and one woman
Section 31.21 - Appearance in person
1 Pa. Code § 31.21 Cited 3 timesAn individual may appear in his own behalf. A member of a partnership may represent the partnership, a bona fide officer of a corporation, trust or association may represent the corporation, trust or association, and an officer or employe of another agency or of a political subdivision may represent the agency or political subdivision in presenting any submittal to an agency subject to these rules. Parties, except individuals appearing in their own behalf, shall be represented in adversary proceedings