Legal Opinion

Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23936e

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 27, 1997No. 36-3PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

107 F.3d 877

Pens. Plan Guide (CCH) P 23936E

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Thomas COSGROVE, husband, on his own behalf and on behalf of

all others similarly situated; Matilda June Cosgrove, wife,

on her own and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

CIRCLE K CORPORATION, a Texas corporation; Circle K

Convenience Stores, Inc., a Texas…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hummell v. S. E. Rykoff & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
  2. Williams v. Caterpillar, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  3. Moreno Roofing Company, Inc. v. NagleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Ruggeri v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2008
  2. Mullin v. OrthweinDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000
  3. In Re CraddockCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
  4. Montgomery v. Aetna Plywood, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1998
  5. Defazio v. Hollister, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2009

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API