green
Positive treatment
4.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958
1992
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Empire Gas Corporation
See Kansas City Star Co. v. United States, 240 F.2d 643, 650-651 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957).
cited
Cited "see"
The Morning Pioneer, Inc. v. The Bismarck Tribune Company, a Corporation, and Cross
Accord, Kansas City Star Company v. United States, 240 F.2d 643, 662 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Addonizio
See Cathcart v. United States, 244 F.2d 74 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 924 , 77 S.Ct. 1387 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1439 (1957).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Catherine Johnson
(2×)
See Kansas City Star Co. v. United States, 240 F.2d 643 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957); United States v. Higgins, 362 F.2d 462 (7th Cir. 1966); United States v. Johnston, 318 F.2d 288 (6th Cir. 1963); Hardy v. United States, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 253 , 335 F.2d 288 (1964).
cited
Cited "see"
Ernie M. Duff v. The Kansas City Star Company, a Corporation, and Emil A. Sees
See Kansas City Star Co. v. United States, 8 Cir., 1957, 240 F.2d 643 , certiorari denied 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 .
cited
Cited "see"
Luther Bailey v. Lee Henslee, Superintendent of the Arkansas State Penitentiary
See, for example, Kansas City Star Company v. United States, 8 Cir., 240 F.2d 643, 650-651 , cer-tiorari denied 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 .
cited
Cited "see"
Bernard Goldfine v. United States of America, Mildred Paperman v. United States
See the procedure outlined in Brody v. United States, 1 Cir., 1957, 243 F.2d 3 .78, certi-orari denied 1957, 354 U.S. 923 ", 77 S.Ct. 1384 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 .
cited
Cited "see"
Bernard Goldfine v. Fred G. Pastore, Group Supervisor, Intelligence Division, Internal Revenue Service
See Brody v. United States, 1 Cir., 1957, 243 F.2d 378 , certiorari denied, 1957, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1384 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 .
cited
Cited "see"
Gretsky v. Miller
See Brody v. United States, 1 Cir., 243 F.2d 378, 381 ., certiorari denied 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1384 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Standard Industries, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Corporation
See also, for example, Kansas City Star Company v. United States, 240 F.2d 643 (8th Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957), where it was declared, at 650, that when intent is an issue, as it was here, it has always been deemed proper, in civil or criminal antitrust proceedings, to introduce "evidence of other acts and doings of the party, of a kindred character, in order to illustrate or establish his intent or motive in the particular act directly in judgment." 36 5.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Standard Industries, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Corp.
See also, for example, Kansas City Star Company v. United States, 240 F.2d 643 (8th Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957), where it was declared, at 650, that when intent is an issue, as it was here, it has always been deemed proper, in civil or criminal antitrust proceedings, to introduce “evidence of other acts and doings of the party, of a kindred character, in order to illustrate or establish his intent or motive in the particular act directly in judgment.” 5.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Willie Strickland, Jr. v. United States
See also, Mercantile Trust Co. v. Hensey, 205 U.S. 298, 306 , 27 S.Ct. 535 , 51 L.Ed. 811 (1907), Berenter v. Staggers, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 141 , 142 n.2, 362 F.2d 971 , 972 n.2 (1966), In re Ripp, 242 F.2d 849, 851 (7th Cir. 1957), Miller v. Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Co., 241 F.2d 116, 118 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1384 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Loren R. Gajewski and Mervin A. Gajewski v. United States
Compare Kansas City Star Co. v. United States, 8 Cir., 240 F.2d 643, 651-653 (1957), cert. denied, 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957), and Malatkofski v. United States, 1 Cir., 179 F.2d 905, 909 (1950) [cases emphasizing trial courts discretionary power to deny motion for severance], with Ingram v. United States, 4 Cir., 272 F.2d 567 (1959) [no discretion to deny severance where multiple defendants are charged with offenses in no way connected].
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Continental Can Company
See also Kansas City Star Company v. United States, 240 F.2d 643 (8 Cir.1957), cert. den. 354 U.S. 923 , 77 S.Ct. 1381 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1438 (1957). 38 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rice
v.
Clemmer, Director, Department of Corrections
v.
Clemmer, Director, Department of Corrections
No. 768.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 17, 1957.
Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Rankin for respondents.
Cited by 8 opinions | Published
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.