Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Meyer Vs. Holley

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 22, 2003

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

43 entries 5 linked 38 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Park US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1975
  2. United States Vs. Wise US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1962
  3. Burlington Industries, Inc. Vs. Ellerth US Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1998
  4. United States Vs. Bestfoods US Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1998
  5. United States Vs. Dotterweich US Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1943
  6. U.S. 280 (2003) October Term, 2002 Syllabus Meyer V. Holley
    Search
  7. acts of their agents or employees in the scope of their authority or employment. E. g., Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
    Search
  8. unusually strict rules only where Congress has specified that such was its intent. See, e. g., United States v. Dotterweich
    Search
  9. defers to an administering agency's reasonable statutory interpretation, e. g., Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  10. Skidmore v. Swift
    Search
  11. curiae urging affirmance were filed for the International Association of Official Human Rights Agencies by Bruce V. Spiva
    Search
  12. that an action brought for compensation by a victim of housing discrimination is, in effect, a tort action. See Curtis v. Loether
    Search
  13. tort-related vicarious liability rules and consequently intends its legislation to incorporate those rules. Monterey v. Del
    Search
  14. internal quotation marks omitted)). Cf. Astoria Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Solimino
    Search
  15. United States v. Texas
    Search
  16. for acts of their agents or employees in the scope of their authority or employment. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
    Search
  17. New Or leans, M., & C. R. Co. v. Hanning
    Search
  18. see Rosenthal & Co. v. Commodity
    Search
  19. Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson
    Search
  20. defer to an administering agency's reasonable interpretation of a stat- 288 ute. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  21. b) (1999) (repealed) (emphasis added). See Gladstone, Realtors v. Village
    Search
  22. however, do not support the kind of nontraditional vicarious liability that the Ninth Circuit applied. See Chicago v. Matchmaker
    Search
  23. Walker v. Crigler
    Search
  24. Marr v. Rife
    Search
  25. F. 3d, at 1131, 1132 (citing Chicago v. Matchmaker
    Search
  26. Real Estate Sales Center, Inc., supra, at 1096-1097, and Walker v. Crigler
    Search
  27. General Building Contractors Assn., Inc. v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  28. matter by the Court of Appeals, we shall not consider it. See Pennsylva- 292 nia Dept. of Corrections v. Yeskey
    Search
  29. U. S. 51 , 63, n. 9 (1998) (quoting United States v. Cordova
    Search
  30. Syllabus Meyer V. Holley
    Search
  31. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  32. Bruce v. Spiva
    Search
  33. See Curtis v. Loether
    Search
  34. Monterey v. Del
    Search
  35. Cf. Astoria Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Solimino
    Search
  36. M., & C. R. Co. v. Hanning
    Search
  37. Rosenthal & Co. v. Commodity
    Search
  38. See Gladstone, Realtors v. Village
    Search
  39. See Chicago v. Matchmaker
    Search
  40. Chicago v. Matchmaker
    Search
  41. and Walker v. Crigler
    Search
  42. Dept. of Corrections v. Yeskey
    Search
  43. United States v. Cordova
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial