green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.7 score
“the polestar is whether a reasonable method of notification is employed and reasonable opportunity to be heard is afforded to the person affected”
Treatment trajectory · 1972 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1972
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Tahan v. Hodgson
the polestar is whether a reasonable method of notification is employed and reasonable opportunity to be heard is afforded to the person affected
cited
Cited "see"
Ronson v. Talesnick
See Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435, 439 (3d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972); Remington Arms Co. v. Liberty Mut.
cited
Cited "see"
Chuidian v. Philippine National Bank
See Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435, 440 (3d Cir.1971) cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
Gilmore v. Henderson
See United States v. Chason, 451 F.2d 301, 305 (2d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1016 , 92 S.Ct. 1291 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Peter R. Ackermann, Dieter Schultze-Zeu, Dietger Feder, Detlef P. Eulitz and Karl-Heinz Lingner v. Ira Levine
See Somportex v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum, 453 F.2d 435, 443 (3d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972) (quoting Goodyear v. Brown, 55 Pa. 514 , 26 A. 665, 666 (1893)); see also, Loucks v. Standard Oil Co., 224 N.Y. 99, 110 , 120 N.E. 198 (1918) (Cardozo, J.) (vested rights *842 may be withheld when “the cause of action in its nature offends our sense of justice or menaces the public welfare”).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Roy L. Williams, Thomas F. O'malley, Andrew G. Massa, Joseph Lombardo
Indeed, the quantum of proof that the government must produce is not great; “[pjresence has been sufficient evidence of knowing participation in a conspiracy when there were suspicious circumstances, and the existence of the conspiracy was already established.” United States v. Dalzotto, 603 F.2d 642, 645 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 994 , 100 S.Ct. 530 , 62 L.Ed.2d 425 (1979); see United States v. Holmes, 452 F.2d 249, 255-56 (7th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1016 , 92 S.Ct. 1291 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. McCabe
See, Somportex Limited v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435 (3d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Suquet
(2×)
First, analogies are drawn to the general law of search and seizure: “[T]he seizure of some items beyond those specified in a search warrant does not result in the suppression of those items which were validly seized.” Id. at 746 ; United States v. Mainello, 345 F.Supp. 863, 877 (E.D.N.Y.1972); see United States v. Holmes, 452 F.2d 249, 259 (7th Cir. 1971) (Stevens, J.), cert, denied, 405 U.S. 1016 , 92 S.Ct. 1291 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. John F. Gibson
See United States v. Chason, 451 F.2d 301 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1016 , 92 S.Ct. 1291 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
Hendrik Koster, a Citizen of the Netherlands v. Automark Industries, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation
See generally Somportex Limited v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435, 440 (3d Cir. 1971), cert. denied 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dow Jones & Co., Inc. v. Harrods, Ltd.
The Hilton Court also stated that: " 'Every nation must be the final judge for itself, not only of the nature and extent of the duty, but of the occasions on which its exercise may be justly demanded.’ ” and that " '[n]o nation will suffer the laws of another to interfere with her own to the injury of her citizens.’ ” Id. at 165, 16 S.Ct. 139 (quoting Story, Conflict of Laws, §§ 33-38); see also Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435, 440 (3d Cir.1971), cert denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972) (noting that "comity does not achieve the…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
American Sales Corp. v. Adventure Travel, Inc.
See, e.g., Sperry Rand Corp. v. A-T-O, Inc., 447 F.2d 1387 (4th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1292 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Banque Libanaise Pour Le Commerce v. Hanna Elias Khreich
Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 , 58 S.Ct. 817 , 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938) (In a diversity action, a federal court must apply the law of the forum state.) Courts have frequently held that state law governs the recognition and enforcement of foreign country judgments. 1 Hunt v. BP Exploration Co. (Libya), Ltd., 492 *1004 F.Supp. 885 (N.D.Tex.1980); see also Somportex, Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 318 F.Supp. 161 (E.D.Pa.1970), aff'd, 453 F.2d 435, 440 (3d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Remington Arms Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
To the extent Liberty Mutual’s second prayer for relief rests on such a theory, the Court could not entertain it. 11 “[Jjoinder of third-party defendants under Rule 14 is not automatic; rather, the decision to permit joinder rests with the sound discretion of the trial court.” Fei-naugle, 595 F.Supp. at 317 ; see also Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435, 439 (3d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972) (trial court’s decision to deny impleader subject to abuse of discretion standard of review); Fuel Transp.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mentink v. World Time Corp. of America
See, e.g., Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435 (3rd Cir.1971) (action to enforce a default judgment obtained in England), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Salsbury Laboratories, Inc. v. Merieux Laboratories, Inc.
See also Sperry Rand Corp. v. A-T-O, Inc., 447 F.2d 1387, 1392-93 (4th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1292 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972); Robert B.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
South Carolina National Bank v. Westpac Banking Corp.
See, e.g., Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435 (3rd Cir.1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Papaioannoiu v. Hellenic Lines, Ltd.
See also, Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum, 453 F.2d 435, 440 (3d Cir.1971), cert. den., 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972); Restatement (Second) of Conflicts, § 98 (1971).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hunt v. BP Exploration Co.(Libya) Ltd.
See also Somportex Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 318 F.Supp. 161 (D.C.), 453 F.2d 435, 440 (3d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972); Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Hall, 367 F.Supp. 1009, 1011-12 (E.D.Ark.1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Royal Bank of Canada v. Trentham Corp.
Compare Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Tremblay, 223 U.S. 185 , 32 S.Ct. 309 , 56 L.Ed. 398 (1912), Somportex, Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., 453 F.2d 435 (3rd Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. *406 1017, 92 S.Ct. 1294 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 (1972), Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Hall, 367 F.Supp. 1009 (E.D.Ark.1973), and Compania Mexicana Rediodifusora Franteriza v. Spann, 41 F.Supp. 907 (N.D.Tex.1941), aff’d 131 F.2d 609 (5th Cir. 1942) with Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, 376 U.S. 398 , 84 S.Ct. 923 , 11 L.Ed.2d 804 (1964), Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbi…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Fernando Medina Cantu
See also United States v. Holmes, 7 Cir. 1971, 92 S.Ct. 1291 , 31 L.Ed.2d 479 ; United States v. Cowley, 10 Cir. 1971, 452 F.2d 243, 247 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Schroeder et ux.
v.
Busenhart
v.
Busenhart
No. 71-1015.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 27, 1972.
Cited by 128 opinions | Published
Citer courts: D.C. Circuit (1)
App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.