Second Circuit· 7/18/1984

Gulliver v. Dalsheim

Citations

739 F.2d 104
1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 20379

How courts have described this case

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

noting past panel retained jurisdiction “in the event that the findings of fact or conclusions of law on the remand d[id] not enable or require the court of appeals to dispose of the case summarily”
although argument in appellate brief was “not as fully or as well presented as it might have been,” holding that it did not sink “to that level of incompetent appellate advocacy that constitutes a violation of the Sixth Amendment”
although argument in appellate brief was “not as fully or as well presented as it might have been,” holding that it did not sink “to that level of incompetent appellate advocacy that constitutes a violation of the Sixth 34 Amendment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.