E.D. Pennsylvania· 11/20/1984
McVan v. Bolco Athletic Co.
Citations
- 600 F. Supp. 375
- 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21861
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Rule 56(f) does not provide parties with a doctrinal vehicle for defeating motions for summary judgment based on unsupported speculation about what may be forthcoming if an extension is granted.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Louis H. Pollak
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Crystalline H2O, Inc. v. OrminskiN.D. New York· 2000-06-12· cited 20×
- Temple University v. Salla Bros., Inc.E.D. Pennsylvania· 1986-10-14· cited 12×
- Alexander v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict of Columbia· 1999-03-31· cited 4×
- IMC Chemicals, Inc. v. Niro, Inc.D. Kansas· 2000-04-27· cited 3×
- Galligan v. City of PhiladelphiaE.D. Pennsylvania· 2001-05-15· cited 2×
- Institut Pasteur v. SimonE.D. Pennsylvania· 2005-06-17
Cites
29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Feres v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1950-12-04· cited 1,830×
- United States v. BrownSupreme Court· 1954-12-06· cited 440×
- Stencel Aero Engineering Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1977-10-03· cited 414×
- Brooks v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1949-05-16· cited 344×
- Mid-South Grizzlies v. National Football LeagueSupreme Court· 1984-05-29· cited 204×
- Robin Construction Company, a Corporation of New Jersey, Richard D. Masia and Judith Masia v. United StatesThird Circuit· 1965-05-14· cited 136×
- Freddie L. Johnson and Clara Johnson, Husband and Wife, and Cross v. United States of America, and Cross-Appellee v. Timothy B. Hay, Third PartyThird Circuit· 1983-08-02· cited 118×
- James Chambers and Lydia Chambers v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1966-03-03· cited 96×
- District 20, United Mine Workers v. SamsSupreme Court· 1972-01-10· cited 95×
- Jon Edward Hass, for the Sole Use and Benefit of the United States of America, and Jon Edward Hass, Individually v. United States of AmericaFourth Circuit· 1975-07-01· cited 86×
- Jaffee v. United StatesThird Circuit· 1981-11-02· cited 79×
- Mid-South Grizzlies v. National Football LeagueThird Circuit· 1983-11-04· cited 77×
- Betz Laboratories, Inc. v. HinesThird Circuit· 1981-05-05· cited 66×
- Gary L. Costlow v. United StatesThird Circuit· 1977-03-22· cited 65×
- Donna J. Woodside, Administratrix of the Estate of Henry William Schroeder v. United StatesSixth Circuit· 1979-09-20· cited 64×
- Heilman v. United StatesThird Circuit· 1984-04-10· cited 59×
- George S. Bailey v. Agusto G. Dequevedo and K. E. Van BuskirkThird Circuit· 1967-04-03· cited 54×
- William G. Ward v. United States of America. Kenneth v. Montag and Alice L. Montag, His Wife v. United StatesThird Circuit· 1973-01-09· cited 51×
- Shearer, Louise, Ind. And as Administratrix of the Estate of Shearer, Vernon, Deceased v. United States of America C/o Peter F. Vaira, U.S. AttorneyThird Circuit· 1984-03-07· cited 47×
- Thomason v. SanchezThird Circuit· 1976-07-22· cited 44×
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.