District of Columbia· 1/6/2005
Velikonja v. Ashcroft
Citations
- 355 F. Supp. 2d 197
- 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178
- 2005 WL 40046
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that because the “plaintiff did not receive a right-to-sue letter resulting from [her] complaint until . . . only three days before the close of (…continued) 539 F. Supp. 2d at 351; Solomon, No. 08-5152 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 12, 2008
- concluding, in answer to “whether plaintiff was required to amend her complaint” that “plaintiff is not barred by the doctrine of res judicata from litigating [events that occurred after her first suit was filed]”
- “The law in this Circuit does not require constant amendments each time plaintiff learns of a new action that could be' claimed to be retaliatory or discriminatory.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hwelle
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Coghlan v. PetersDistrict of Columbia· 2008-05-28· cited 21×
- Alford v. Providence HospitalDistrict of Columbia· 2014-07-25· cited 17×
- ESTATE OF GAITHER EX REL. GAITHER v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia· 2009-09-08· cited 15×
- Toms v. Office of the Architect of the CapitolDistrict of Columbia· 2009-09-03· cited 15×
- Brown v. PaulsonDistrict of Columbia· 2008-04-01· cited 8×
- Geter v. United States Government Publishing OfficeDistrict of Columbia· 2017-07-31· cited 6×
- Velikonja v. GonzalesDistrict of Columbia· 2007-08-15· cited 5×
- Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. Filmon X, LLCDistrict of Columbia· 2015-12-02· cited 4×
- Sadid v. VailasD. Idaho· 2013-03-28· cited 4×
- Patton Boggs LLP v. Chevron CorporationDistrict of Columbia· 2011-08-08· cited 3×
- Gaither v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia· 2009-09-08
- MacKenzie v. CarsonDistrict of Columbia· 2021-03-18
Cites
31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court· 1957-11-18· cited 30,380×
- National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. MorganSupreme Court· 2002-06-10· cited 6,600×
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court· 1981-06-15· cited 2,470×
- Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.Supreme Court· 1982-05-17· cited 2,347×
- Brenda Curtis and Alvin Williamson v. Citibank, N.A., Citicorp North America, Inc. And Citicorp SecuritiesSecond Circuit· 2000-09-19· cited 587×
- Lisa L. Fitzgerald v. William Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal ServiceSecond Circuit· 2001-05-31· cited 413×
- Richard Drake v. Federal Aviation AdministrationD.C. Circuit· 2002-07-22· cited 381×
- Darrell R. Page v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1984-03-13· cited 334×
- Ronald T. Phillips v. Bureau of PrisonsD.C. Circuit· 1979-01-15· cited 275×
- John Stanton v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsD.C. Circuit· 1997-12-03· cited 268×
- I.A.M. National Pension Fund, Benefit Plan a v. Industrial Gear Manufacturing CompanyD.C. Circuit· 1983-12-13· cited 257×
- Mary P. Valentino, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. United States Postal ServiceD.C. Circuit· 1982-03-26· cited 195×
- Apotex, Inc. v. Food & Drug AdministrationD.C. Circuit· 2004-12-21· cited 181×
- John H. Hapgood v. City of WarrenSixth Circuit· 1997-09-25· cited 175×
- Tamera Herrmann v. Cencom Cable Associates, IncorporatedSeventh Circuit· 1993-07-09· cited 174×
- Lucille Qualls Woods v. Dunlop Tire CorporationSecond Circuit· 1992-08-11· cited 152×
- Hardison v. AlexanderD.C. Circuit· 1981-05-26· cited 152×
- U.S. Industries, Inc. v. Blake Construction Co., Inc.D.C. Circuit· 1985-06-21· cited 119×
- In Re Swine Flu Immunization Products Liability Litigation. Linda Kenneda v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1989-08-08· cited 97×
- Maljack Productions, Inc. v. Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.D.C. Circuit· 1995-04-28· cited 89×
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.