Kenneth Bardonner v. Veronika Bardonner

How courts have described this case

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

• indicating that internally inconsistent instructions do not govern the sufficiency inquiry
• “a social security card [informs] those who examine it that the bearer is eligible to work in the United States”
• rule applies to all instructions “not patently incorrect or internally inconsistent”
• first citing Chiarella v. United States, 445 U.S. 222, 236 (1980); then citing United States v. Angiulo, 897 F.2d 1169, 1197 (1st Cir. 1990); and then citing United States v. Hill, 835 F.2d 759, 764 n.7 (10th Cir. 1987)
• explaining, in an analogous context under 42 U.S.C.A. § 408(g)(3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).