Case Citator › Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. Estes

Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. Estes

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Good law
Court
Ninth Circuit
Citation
154 F.3d 952
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
294 of 294
Citing cases (total)
2,479
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. Rand v. Rowland remains good law: all 294 flagged citations have been read, and no adverse treatment was confirmed. Citing courts used the en banc decision for circuit-precedent procedure, summary-judgment practice, notice, and appointment-of-counsel standards.
More on how this was screened

Nearby “overruled” language reported the en banc decision's effect on the earlier panel opinion or concerned unrelated precedent. The last three opinions, Johnsen v. Tambe, Kennedy v. County of Contra Costa, and Torres Morales v. Morales, applied Rand's summary-judgment notice requirement.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

2,479 later cases cite Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. Estes; 294 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. Estes?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 294 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Lee A. Rand v. James Rowland Nadim Khoury, M.D., William Bunnell Roy Lee Johnson Leo R. Estes and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace