D. New Jersey· 4/10/1996
Weinberg v. Sprint Corp.
Citations
- 165 F.R.D. 431
- 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4661
- 1996 WL 172560
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- collecting cases from many jurisdictions noting that the Act does not satisfy the second prong of the complete preemption test
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Pisano
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Tenore v. AT&T Wireless ServicesWashington Supreme Court· 1998-09-10· cited 185×
- Day v. AT & T CORP.California Court of Appeal· 1998-04-20· cited 139×
- Weinberg v. Sprint Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey· 2002-07-22· cited 98×
- Union Ink Co., Inc. v. AT&T CORP.New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2002-06-28· cited 56×
- Bishop v. General Motors Corp.D. New Jersey· 1996-04-29· cited 43×
- Sanderson, Thompson, Ratledge & Zimny v. AWACS, Inc.D. Delaware· 1997-03-25· cited 30×
- In Re Comcast Cellular Telecommunications LitigationE.D. Pennsylvania· 1996-12-06· cited 22×
- Ball v. GTE Mobilnet of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2000-07-06· cited 16×
- Amundson & Associates Art Studio, Ltd. v. National Council on Compensation InsuranceD. Kansas· 1997-09-17· cited 16×
- Bryceland v. AT & T CORP.N.D. Texas· 2000-11-27· cited 14×
- Moriconi v. AT & T WIRELESS PCS, LLCE.D. Arkansas· 2003-08-19· cited 12×
- Lauchheimer v. Gulf OilD. New Jersey· 1998-04-27· cited 8×
- Russell v. Sprint Corp.D. Kansas· 2003-05-22· cited 8×
- STATE EX RE. NIXON v. Nextel West Corp.E.D. Missouri· 2003-02-04· cited 5×
- In Re Universal Service Fund Telephone Billing Practices LitigationD. Kansas· 2002-12-19· cited 5×
- Rivera-Lebron v. Cellular OneD. Puerto Rico· 1998-07-17· cited 4×
- Johnson v. Gerber Products Co.E.D. Pennsylvania· 1996-12-18· cited 2×
- Myhre v. AT & TD. Kansas· 2002-12-19· cited 1×
Cites
37 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1987-06-09· cited 6,547×
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court· 1983-06-24· cited 5,652×
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court· 1987-04-06· cited 3,207×
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court· 1947-05-05· cited 2,636×
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court· 1981-06-15· cited 2,470×
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court· 1986-07-07· cited 2,209×
- Gully v. First Nat. Bank in MeridianSupreme Court· 1936-11-09· cited 2,167×
- Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. De La CuestaSupreme Court· 1982-06-28· cited 1,769×
- Unnamed caseThird Circuit· 1995-12-08· cited 957×
- Zahn v. International Paper Co.Supreme Court· 1973-12-17· cited 866×
- James F. Boyer and Mary R. Boyer v. Snap-On Tools Corporation, Kenneth Baldwin and Keith A. Kaiser. Appeal of James F. Boyer and Mary R. BoyerThird Circuit· 1990-09-05· cited 704×
- Nader v. Allegheny Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court· 1976-06-07· cited 497×
- California v. ARC America Corp.Supreme Court· 1989-04-18· cited 472×
- Cox v. Sears Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1994-09-15· cited 404×
- Bell v. Preferred Life Assurance SocietySupreme Court· 1943-11-08· cited 296×
- Helen W. ANGUS, Appellant, v. SHILEY INC.Third Circuit· 1993-03-29· cited 203×
- Ivy Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company and New York Telephone Company, Defendants-Appellees-AppellantsSecond Circuit· 1968-02-13· cited 186×
- Missouri State Life Insurance v. JonesSupreme Court· 1933-12-04· cited 163×
- Unnamed caseThird Circuit· 1995-04-26· cited 160×
- In Re Abbott LaboratoriesFifth Circuit· 1995-04-24· cited 134×
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.