Camarena v. Meissner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “the grant of [F]amily [U]nity benefits is mandatory, not discretionary”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Miriam Eliu Yepez-Razo v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General
  Ninth Circuit· 2006-04-24· cited 13×
• Morris v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia· 2014-04-25· cited 10×
• Hovhannisyan v. United States Department of Homeland Security
  C.D. California· 2008-10-14· cited 4×
• Yepez-Razo v. Gonzales
  Ninth Circuit· 2006-04-24

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of Catrett
  Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
• Raymond E. ANDREWS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee
  Ninth Circuit· 1995-05-01· cited 3,694×
• Lewis Eisenberg v. Insurance Company of North America, Cigna Corporation
  Ninth Circuit· 1987-04-28· cited 349×
• Walters v. Reno
  Ninth Circuit· 1998-05-18· cited 215×
• Occidental Engineering Company v. Immigration And Naturalization Service
  Ninth Circuit· 1985-02-11· cited 194×
• Byron Paredes-Urrestarazu v. U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service
  Ninth Circuit· 1994-08-23· cited 160×
• National Center for Immigrants Rights, Inc. v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
  Ninth Circuit· 1984-09-28· cited 66×
• Baria v. Reno
  Ninth Circuit· 1996-09-05· cited 18×
• Hernandez v. Reno
  Fifth Circuit· 1996-08-21· cited 14×
• Unnamed case
  Ninth Circuit· 1997-05-27· cited 1×