From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Monroe Clinic v. Nelson

U.S.
Oct 10, 1991
502 U.S. 903 (1991)

Summary

holding that patients who were denied medical treatment on non-emergency basis had standing to bring antitrust action against medical center

Summary of this case from Serfecz v. Jewel Food Stores

Opinion

No. 91-61.

October 10, 1991.


Dismissal Under Rule 46

C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari dismissed under this Court's Rule 46. Reported below: 925 F. 2d 1555.


Summaries of

Monroe Clinic v. Nelson

U.S.
Oct 10, 1991
502 U.S. 903 (1991)

holding that patients who were denied medical treatment on non-emergency basis had standing to bring antitrust action against medical center

Summary of this case from Serfecz v. Jewel Food Stores

holding that it was within the district court's discretion to appoint an expert to provide the court scientific information regarding the levels of environmental tobacco smoke in a prison and the potential health effects upon prisoners.

Summary of this case from Yellen v. Olivarez

finding that the phrase "such proportion as the court directs," in an appropriate case, permits the district court to apportion all costs to one side

Summary of this case from Ledford v. Sullivan

finding that the phrase "such proportion as the court directs," in an appropriate case, permits the district court to apportion all costs to one side

Summary of this case from Hampton v. Peeples

finding that the phrase "such proportion as the court directs," in an appropriate case, permits the district court to apportion all costs to one side

Summary of this case from Mitchell v. Williams

reviewing for an abuse of discretion and noting that "[p]roduction of the transcript at government expense for an appellant in forma pauperis in a civil case is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 753 if a trial judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question"

Summary of this case from Foster v. Cole

reviewing for an abuse of discretion and noting that "[p]roduction of the transcript at government expense for an appellant in forma pauperis in a civil case is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 753 if a trial judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question"

Summary of this case from Gieck v. Donovan

reviewing for an abuse of discretion and noting that "[p]roduction of the transcript at government expense for an appellant in forma pauperis in a civil case is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 753 if a trial judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question"

Summary of this case from Singleton v. Hernandez

reviewing for an abuse of discretion and noting that "[p]roduction of the transcript at government expense for an appellant in forma pauperis in a civil case is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 753 if a trial judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial question"

Summary of this case from Brown v. Kyle

reasoning that allowing court-appointed experts only when both sides are able to pay their respective shares would hinder a district court from appointing an expert witness, "even when the expert would significantly help the court"

Summary of this case from McCabe v. Gibbons

reasoning that allowing court-appointed experts only when both sides are able to pay their respective shares would hinder a district court from appointing an expert witness, "even when the expert would significantly help the court"

Summary of this case from Smith v. Waddington

reasoning that allowing court-appointed experts only when both sides are able to pay their respective shares would hinder a district court from appointing an expert witness, "even when the expert would significantly help the court"

Summary of this case from Honeycutt v. Snider

observing that an expert witness may be appointed if needed to significantly assist the court, and if the case involves complex scientific issues

Summary of this case from Young v. Smalls

reasoning that allowing court-appointed experts only when both sides are able to pay their respective shares would hinder a district court from appointing an expert witness, "even when the expert would significantly help the court"

Summary of this case from McGuire v. State

stating expert may be appointed when case is complex

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Sullivan
Case details for

Monroe Clinic v. Nelson

Case Details

Full title:MONROE CLINIC v. NELSON et al

Court:U.S.

Date published: Oct 10, 1991

Citations

502 U.S. 903 (1991)

Citing Cases

Serfecz v. Jewel Food Stores

The Court has identified several factors to be considered in determining whether a plaintiff is the proper…

Claiborne v. Blauser

We note, however, that the district court appears to misstate the law when it denied Claiborne’s request for…