holding district court order which extended a deadline provided in a consent decree to be "in the nature of a preliminary injunction" and appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292
Summary of this case from U.S. v. Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.No. 84-112.
November 13, 1984.
C.A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 730 F. 2d 12.
holding district court order which extended a deadline provided in a consent decree to be "in the nature of a preliminary injunction" and appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292
Summary of this case from U.S. v. Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.holding there to be no due process violation where excluded testimony bore "none of the indicia of substantial trustworthiness that were crucial in Chambers"
Summary of this case from Cikora v. WainwrightFull title:ARONSON et al. v. SERVUS RUBBER DIVISION OF CHROMALLOY AMERICAN…
Court:U.S.
Date published: Nov 13, 1984
Section 510 of ERISA relates to discriminatory conduct directed against individuals; it does not forbid…
Zsupnik v. StateId. Zsupnik argued on appeal that both the plain language of AS 12.20.150(b), as well as our decision in…