TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Carolco Television Inc. v. National Broadcasting Co.

CAROLCO TELEVISION INC. v. NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC.

Carolco Television Inc. v. Nat'l Broad. Co., 113 S. Ct. 330 (1992)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
October 13, 1992
Docket
No. 92-345
Citations
113 S. Ct. 330
Cited by 9 1 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Denied.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 9 cases

View all citing references →
1992: 11993: 21995: 11997: 11998: 12001: 12002: 12015: 119922026peak 1993 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Flagstaff Realty Associates60 F.3d 1031 (3d Cir. 1995)
  2. In re Village Craftsman, Inc.160 B.R. 740 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1993)
  3. Precision Pay Phones v. Qwest Communications Corp.210 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (N.D. Cal. 2002)
  4. In re Phoenix Petroleum Co.278 B.R. 385 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2001)
  5. Pettibone Corp. v. United States (In re Pettibone Corp.)151 B.R. 156 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1992)
  6. King v. National General Insurance129 F. Supp. 3d 925 (N.D. Cal. 2015)

Most recent

  1. King v. National General Insurance129 F. Supp. 3d 925 (N.D. Cal. 2015)
  2. Precision Pay Phones v. Qwest Communications Corp.210 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (N.D. Cal. 2002)
  3. In re Phoenix Petroleum Co.278 B.R. 385 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2001)
  4. In re Sedlock219 B.R. 207 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1998)
  5. Expeditors International of Washington, Inc. v. Official Creditors Committee of CFLC, Inc. (In re CFLC, Inc.)97 Daily Journal DAR 8481 (9th Cir. BAP 1997)
  6. In re Flagstaff Realty Associates60 F.3d 1031 (3d Cir. 1995)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list