Tenth Circuit· 10/31/2001
Sheldon v. Charles Schwab
Citations
- 269 F.3d 1202
- 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 23624
- 2001 WL 1338399
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- explaining that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a plaintiff’s amended pleadings fail to cure the deficiencies in his claims
- explaining that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a plaintiff’s amended pleadings fail to cure the deficiencies in his claims
- explaining that an arbitrator may resolve all issues in the scope of arbitration, even by dismissing a claim pre-hearing
- explaining that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a plaintiff’s amended pleadings fail to cure the deficiencies in his claims
- explaining that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a plaintiff’s amended pleadings fail to cure the deficiencies in his claims
- explaining that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a plaintiff’s amended pleadings fail to cure the deficiencies in his claims
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Ebel, Kelly, Lucero
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
30 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Steele v. Federal Bureau of PrisonsTenth Circuit· 2003-12-29· cited 242×
- National Football League Management Council v. National Football League Players Ass'nSecond Circuit· 2016-04-25· cited 222×
- Stan Lee Media, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co.Tenth Circuit· 2014-12-23· cited 121×
- Brabham v. A.G. Edwards & Sons Inc.Fifth Circuit· 2004-07-16· cited 81×
- Hoeft v. MVL Group, Inc.Second Circuit· 2003-09-03· cited 59×
- Lessin, Michael v. Merrill Lynch PierceD.C. Circuit· 2007-03-16· cited 46×
- Hollern Ex Rel. Price v. Wachovia Securities, Inc.Tenth Circuit· 2006-08-16· cited 31×
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Public Service Co.Tenth Circuit· 2010-12-10· cited 20×
- DMA International, Inc. v. Qwest Communications International, Inc.Tenth Circuit· 2009-11-04· cited 17×
- Mid Atlantic Capital v. BienTenth Circuit· 2020-04-14· cited 17×
- 1745 WAZEE LLC v. Castle Builders Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals· 2003-12-18· cited 10×
- Moreland v. PERKINS, SMART & BOYDCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2010-10-01· cited 9×
- Pennington v. Cuna Brokerage Securities, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal· 2008-10-01· cited 8×
- Griffith v. McGovernCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2006-09-01· cited 6×
- Neighbors Construction Co. v. Woodland Park at Soldier Creek, LLCCourt of Appeals of Kansas· 2012-08-03· cited 6×
- Immersion Corp. v. Sony Computer Entertainment America LLCN.D. California· 2016-05-19· cited 5×
- Kalmar Industries USA LLC v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 838D. Kansas· 2006-09-26· cited 4×
- Abbott v. MulliganD. Utah· 2009-08-13· cited 4×
- Gocha v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.D. Colorado· 2014-12-12· cited 4×
- Cessna Aircraft Co. v. Avcorp Industries, Inc.D. Kansas· 2013-05-01· cited 4×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Willemijn Houdstermaatschappij, Bv v. Standard Microsystems CorporationSecond Circuit· 1997-01-02· cited 316×
- ARW Exploration Corp. v. AguirreTenth Circuit· 1995-01-23· cited 161×
- Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad v. Union Pacific RailroadTenth Circuit· 1997-07-17· cited 107×
- Dodge v. Cotter CorporationTenth Circuit· 2000-02-11· cited 90×
- Bowles Financial Group, Inc. v. Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc.Tenth Circuit· 1994-04-26· cited 68×
- Brown v. Coleman CompanyTenth Circuit· 2000-07-20· cited 47×
- Orvail Sherman v. American Federation of Musicians, an Unincorporated Association, DefendantTenth Circuit· 1978-12-15· cited 28×
- Prudential Securities, Inc. v. DaltonN.D. Oklahoma· 1996-04-18· cited 16×
- Warren v. TacherW.D. Kentucky· 2000-06-02· cited 7×
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.