green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
10.2 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1986 ·
…the scope of the government contractor rule should be drawn somewhat ... broadly
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 26 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Crossan v. ELECTRON TUBE DIV.
the scope of the government contractor rule should be drawn somewhat ... broadly
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Crossan v. Electron Tube Division, A Division of Litton Systems, Inc.
the scope of the government contractor rule should be drawn somewhat ... broadly
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Cynthia Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois
(4×)
Finally, the court expressed reluctance to “take so big a step in the face of the Supreme Court’s apparent desire to contain the principle of Elrod and Branti.” Id. at 294-95; see also Horn v. Kean, 796 F.2d 668 (3d Cir.1986) (en banc) (partisan dismissal of motor vehicle agents who were independent contractors, not employees, held not to violate First Amendment); Sweeney v. Bond, 669 F.2d 542, 545-46 (8th Cir.) (partisan dismissals of “fee agents” who were independent contractors held not to violate First Amendment), ce rt. denied, 459 U.S. 878 , 103 S.Ct. 174 , 74 L.Ed.2d 143 (1982…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Cynthia Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois
(4×)
In reaching its conclusion, the LaFalce court balanced the interference with political expression caused by the patronage practice against "the consequences of trying to prevent [the interference] through an interpretation of the Constitution." Id. at 293-94. 28 The court first found that a contractor's loss of a particular bid was less disruptive than an employee's loss of a job; a contractor still has other potential contracts to bid on.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Horn v. Kean
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Id. at 294 (emphasis supplied). 9 The record here supports precisely the motor vehicle agents’ diminished dependency on the state to which the LaFalce court made reference.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Horn v. Kean
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Id. at 294 (emphasis supplied). 9 27 The record here supports precisely the motor vehicle agents' diminished dependency on the state to which the LaFalce court made reference.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois
The court, referring to the plaintiff's claim to protection under Elrod , concluded: We are particularly reluctant to take so big a step in the face of the Supreme Court’s apparent desire to contain the principle of Elrod and Branti____ Id. at 294-95.
cited
Cited "see"
Snell v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.
See McKay v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 , 453 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Snell v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.
See McKay v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 , 453 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Johnson v. Grumman Corp.
See In Re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases, 960 F.2d 806 (9th Cir.1992) (defense limited to cases involving complex and sensitive military decisions and not applicable to products readily available on the commercial market) (citing McKay v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 , 451 (9th Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984) (military contractor defense does not apply to “an ordinary consumer product purchased by the armed forces”)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mitra Koohi Iman Koohi, Minor Daughter Kosar Koohi, Minor Daughter Hassan Almassi Iran Air Flight 655 v. United States of America United States Department of Navy, Elizabeth H. Bailey, as the Personal Representative v. Varian Associates, Inc. General Electric Co. Ge Aerospace Rca Corp Harnischfeger Industries Syscon Corp. Computer Sciences Corporation John Connor
See McKay v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 (9th Cir.1983) (holding that the discretionary function exception to the FTCA preempts an action against defense contractors brought under the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 761 et seq.) cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Koohi v. United States
See McKay v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 (9th Cir.1983) (holding that the discretionary function exception to the FTCA preempts an action against defense contractors brought under the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 761 et seq.) cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Murchison
See Fontana v. Barham, 707 F.2d 221, 225-27 (5th Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Fireman's Fund Insurance Company v. Clint W. Murchison, Iii
See Fontana v. Barham, 707 F.2d 221, 225-27 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984). 18 The Trusts based their claim on Arnold v. National County Mut.
cited
Cited "see"
Rivera Diaz v. Puerto Rico Telephone Co.
See La Falce v. Houston, 712 F.2d 292 (7th Cir.1983), cert. den., 464 U.S. 1044 , 104 S.Ct. 712 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown v. United States
See McKay v. Rockwell International, 704 F.2d 444 , 464 (9th Cir. 1983), cert. denied — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984); Nygaard v. Peter Pan Seafoods, 701 F.2d 77, 81 (9th Cir.1983); Bodden v. American Offshore, Inc., 681 F.2d 319, 329 (5th Cir.1982); Barger v. Petroleum Helicopters, Inc., 514 F.Supp. 1199, 1210 (E.D.Tex.1981), rev'd on other grounds, 692 F.2d 337 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 958 , 103 S.Ct. 2430 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1316 (1983). 18 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Horn v. Kean
See LaFalce v. Houston, 712 F.2d 292, 295 (7th Cir.1983) (“Some day the Supreme Court may extend the principle of its public-employee cases to contractors, but there are enough differences in the strength of the competing interests in the two classes of cases to persuade us not to attempt to do so.”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 712 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984). 6 N.J.S.A. 39:3-3 provides that the Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles in the Department of Law and Public Safety ... shall designate at least 1 person in each county for each 300,000 inhabitants or fraction thereof to b…
discussed
Cited "see"
Shaw v. Grumman Aerospace Corp.
See McKay v. Rockwell International Corp., 704 F.2d 444, 451 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984); In Re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 534 F.Supp. 1046, 1055 (E.D.N.Y.1982); and Hubbs v. United Technologies, 574 F.Supp. 96, 98 (E.D.Pa.1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Richland-Lexington Airport District v. Atlas Properties, Inc.
Prior to Boyle , the courts concluded that the Feres-Stencel doctrine was the genesis of the government contractor defense; See, e.g., McKay v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 , 449 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bentzlin v. Hughes Aircraft Co.
Compare Mitchell v. Lone Star Ammunition, Inc., 913 F.2d 242, 246 (5th Cir.1990) (citations omitted) (" ‘[Fjederal law provides no defense to the military contractor that mismanufactures military equipment or that is itself ultimately responsible for the design defect.' ”) and McKay v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 , 451 (9th Cir.1983) (in dictum, noting that the government contractor defense does not relieve suppliers of military equipment of liability for defects in the manufacture of that equipment), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984) with Harduve…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mary Carley v. Wheeled Coach
If the system is working as it should, Government contractors will design equipment to avoid certain injuries (like the deaths of soldiers or Government employees) which would be certain to burden the Government. 61 487 U.S. at 530 , 108 S.Ct. at 2528 (Brennan, J., dissenting); see also McKay v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 704 F.2d 444 , 457 (9th Cir.1983) (Alarcon, J., dissenting) (contractors with better safety records will secure less expensive liability insurance and will pass those savings, as well as the benefits of greater safety, on to the government), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bd. of Educ. of Clifton v. WR Grace
See also McKay v. Rockwell International Corp., 704 F. 2d 444, 450 (9th Cir. 1983), cert. den., 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed. 2d 175 (1984) (when only minimal or very general requirements are set forth by the United States contract, the government contractor defense is inapplicable). [ 211 N.J.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Valerie Boruski v. The United States of America, Merck, Sharp and Dohme Company, and the City of Chicago, a Municipal Corporation
See, e.g., McKay v. Rockwell International Corp., 704 F.2d 444 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McDermott v. TENDUN CONSTRUCTORS, ROHR INDUSTRIES, INC.
See also McKay v. Rockwell International Corp., 704 F. 2d 444, 450 (9th Cir.1983), cert. den., 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed. 2d 175 (1984) (when only minimal or very general requirements are set forth by the United States contract, the government contractor defense is inapplicable).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Asbestos Litigation (Mergenthaler)
See, e.g., McKay v. Rockwell International Corp., 9th Cir., 704 F.2d 444 , 454 & n. 14 (1983), cert. denied 464 U.S. 1043 , 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984); Marker v. Universal Oil Products Co., 10th Cir., 250 F.2d 603, 606-07 (1957) (applying Oklahoma law); Goodbar v. Whitehead Bros., W.D.Va., 591 F.Supp. 552, 560-61 (1984) (applying Virginia law), aff'd sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nancy L. Tillett, Administratrix of the Estate of Stephen M. Tillett v. J.I. Case Company
(2×)
See, e.g., McKay v. Rockwell International Corp., 704 F.2d 444 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 711 , 79 L.Ed.2d 175 (1984); Brown v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 696 F.2d 246 (3d Cir.1982); Hubbs v. United Technologies, 574 F.Supp. 96 (E.D.Pa. 1983); In re “Agent Orange”Product Liability Litigation, 534 F.Supp. 1046 (E.D.N.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
McKay, of the Estate of McKay
v.
Rockwell International Corp.
v.
Rockwell International Corp.
No. 83-754.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 9, 1984.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: E.D. Michigan (2)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.