Deletion of Robertson v. McGraw-Hill Co., Weiss, and Shepard

Comment: If any one AFD can show that our rules are out of control, and that anyone can find a reason to delete anything, it would be this AFD. This is the first time I have ever heard such obscure rules as  and , but somehow, editors are trying to argue that these obscure rules trump reliable sources, a rule which everyone knows about, and which  Cool Hand Luke himself acknowledges, "there does seem to be a handful of quality independent sources". Very well referenced article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EFFECT||WP:PERSISTENCE)

Comment: per nom.  Once the  and  is removed, and once the material that should be in Tiger Management is moved there, there's nothing left worthy of an independent article. Any RS'd content can be included in Tiger Management without loss to the project
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN||WP:LARD)