United Forest Products Co. v. Baxter

How courts have described this case

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

• “There is nothing unconstitutional in a legislature’s conferring 21 a benefit on prisoners only prospectively.”
• “Services performed by an attorney in connection with a lawsuit do 19 not constitute action under color of state law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Pence v. Brown
  Eighth Circuit· 1980-08-15· cited 23×
• Tom Holder v. Maaco Enterprises
  Fourth Circuit· 1981-03-09· cited 7×
• Daniel Hamm Drayage Co. v. Waldinger Corp.
  E.D. Missouri· 1981-04-09· cited 4×
• Allen v. Weinberger
  E.D. Missouri· 1982-09-01· cited 2×
• Unnamed case
  Eighth Circuit· 1971-12-09

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Bagdasarian v. Gragnon
  California Supreme Court· 1948-04-30· cited 180×
• Schmidt v. Mesmer
  California Supreme Court· 1897-03-12· cited 88×
• Bean v. Bickley
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 1919-11-11· cited 41×
• Lawson v. Town & Country Shops, Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 1958-04-07· cited 28×
• Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Rau Const. Co.
  Eighth Circuit· 1942-08-19· cited 27×
• Weitzman v. Bergstrom
  Washington Supreme Court· 1969-04-17· cited 16×
• Christy v. Heil
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 1963-09-17· cited 13×
• Commercial Ins. Co. of Newark v. Burnquist
  N.D. Iowa· 1952-06-30· cited 13×
• Friedberg v. Weissbuch
  California Court of Appeal· 1955-09-28· cited 11×
• Hagen v. Barry
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 1922-12-15· cited 8×
• Wellens v. Beck
  North Dakota Supreme Court· 1957-06-03· cited 6×

Other cases named United Forest Products Co. v. Baxter

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• United Forest Products Co. v. Baxter
  Supreme Court· 1969-05-05· cited 1×