District of Columbia· 5/13/2003
Smith v. Koplan
Citations
- 215 F.R.D. 11
- 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7967
- 91 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1653
- 2003 WL 21057853
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “reconsideration [is not] to be used to ask the Court to rethink what it has 15 already thought”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Facciola
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Nuskey v. LambrightDistrict of Columbia· 2008-06-10· cited 16×
- Doe v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia· 2005-07-21· cited 5×
- Roberson v. BairDistrict of Columbia· 2007-05-10· cited 5×
- Benham v. RiceDistrict of Columbia· 2006-09-14· cited 4×
- Mines v. Capital Group CompaniesDistrict of Columbia· 2009-10-15
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Schlagenhauf v. HolderSupreme Court· 1965-01-18· cited 1,194×
- Michele E. Shepherd and Larue Graves v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.D.C. Circuit· 1995-10-06· cited 385×
- Stinchcomb v. United StatesE.D. Pennsylvania· 1990-08-22· cited 23×
- Shepherd v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.District of Columbia· 1993-09-03· cited 18×
- Ali v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.M.D. Florida· 1995-04-25· cited 12×
- Thiessen v. General Electric Capital Corp.D. Kansas· 1998-03-12· cited 11×
- Gattegno v. Pricewaterhousecoopers, LLPD. Connecticut· 2001-10-30· cited 9×
- United States v. ButlerDistrict of Columbia· 1971-04-15· cited 5×
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.