green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.6 score
“the communications between defendant and were not privileged, since third persons were present at the time the communications were made.”
Treatment trajectory · 1972 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1972
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Zolp
the communications between defendant and were not privileged, since third persons were present at the time the communications were made.
cited
Cited "see"
Blackwell v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
See Keller v. Dravo Corporation, 441 F.2d 1239, 1245 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Boucher v. McGovern
See Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1241-42 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972). *1379 Additionally, although the right of access to the courts is an aspect of the right to petition the government, California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508, 510, 513 , 92 S.Ct. 609, 612, 613 , 30 L.Ed.2d 642, 646, 648 (1972), such right does not entail absolute authorization to assert any possible type of claim.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Bassel C., No. 92 09 004 (Feb. 5, 1993)
See State v. Cobuzzi, 161 Conn. 371 , 376 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 677 , 30 L.Ed.2d 664 (1972); State v. Kaplan, 20 Conn. App. 183 , 186 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Enrique S., No. 92 09 037 (Feb. 5, 1993)
See State v. Cobuzzi, 161 Conn. 371 , 376 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 677 , 30 L.Ed.2d 664 (1972); State v. Kaplan, 20 Conn. App. 183 , 186 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Barry G., (Jul. 24, 1992)
See state v. Corbuzzi, 11 Conn. 371 , 376 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 677 , 30 L.Ed.2d 664 (1972); State v. Kaplan, 20 Conn. App. 183 , 186 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re David M., (Feb. 6, 1992)
See State v. Corbuzzi, 161 Conn. 371 , 376 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 677 , 30 L.Ed.2d 664 (1972); State v. Kaplan, 20 Conn. App. 183 , 186 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Alex M., (Sep. 21, 1990)
See State v. Corbuzzi, 161 Conn. 371 , 376 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct.
discussed
Cited "see"
Sienkiewycz v. Dressell
See Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1241-42 (5th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 (1972) (exclusive remedy provision of *425 federal Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act held constitutional under rational basis test); Benjamin v. Ricks, 63 Cal. App. 3d 593, 597 , 132 Cal. Rptr. 758, 760 (1976) (California statute’s limitation on employee’s right to recover from employer for pain and suffering held rationally related to legitimate governmental interest); Parker v. Energy Development Co., 691 P.2d 981, 988 (Wyo. 1984) (Wyoming’s exclusive remedy provision he…
discussed
Cited "see"
Brookings v. State
See United States v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir.1971) (waiver of the privilege when alleged privileged communication between former attorney and client was made in the presence of trial counsel and government attorneys), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Federici
That is, *55 whether we view the search and seizure as being chronologically prior to the arrest, as they certainly were, or as also being “contemporaneous” with it and an “integral part of a single incident”; see State v. Cobuzzi, 161 Conn. 371, 377-79 , 288 A.2d 439 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S. Ct. 677 , 30 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
DiGiovanni v. Traylor Bros., Inc.
See, e.g., Kathriner, 975 F.2d at 662-63 ; Ducrepont, 877 F.2d at 396 ; Davis v. Cargill, Inc., 808 F.2d 361, 362 (5th Cir.1986); see also Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1244 (5th Cir.1971) (dry dock used for ship repair is not a vessel when moored), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972); Chahoc v. Hunt Shipyard, 431 F.2d 576 , 577 (5th Cir.1970) (floating dry dock is not a vessel when moored and operated as a dry dock), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 982 , 91 S.Ct. 1198 , 28 L.Ed.2d 333 (1971).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Harrison
See, e.g., State v. Corbuzzi, 161 Conn. 371, 376 , 288 A.2d 439 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 925 S. Ct. 677 , 30 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Company, Inc. v. C.N. Lloyd Brasileiro, the Hartford Insurance Company of Alabama, in Personam
See, e.g., Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1244 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972) (although court did not preclude finding that floating drydock could be vessel under different facts, court here found as a matter of law that floating drydock was not a “vessel"); Bernardo v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 314 F.2d 604, 608 (2d Cir.1963) (jury properly decided that floating drydock was not “vessel” within the meaning of Jones Act), Floating drydocks have been classified as “vessels” for admiralty purposes when they become active some way in …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Garza v. State
For a good discussion of this general rule and its underlying policy considerations as applied by the federal courts, see U.S. v. Hockridge, 573 F.2d 752 (2nd Cir.1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 821 , 99 S.Ct. 85 , 58 L.Ed.2d 112 (1978); U.S. v. Grieco, 261 F.2d 414 (2nd Cir.1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 907 , 79 S.Ct. 582 , 3 L.Ed.2d 572 (1959); See also U.S. v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Craig Mccarthy v. The Bark Peking
Compare, e.g., Keller v. Dravo, 441 F.2d 1239, 1243-44 (5 Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 (1971) (floating drydock attached to dock and used as construction platform held not to be a vessel under LHWCA as a matter of law); Chahoc v. Hunt Shipyard, 431 F.2d 576, 577 (5 Cir.1970) (same), with Burks v. American River Transportation Co., supra, 679 F.2d at 71, 75 (non-propelled river barge held to be a vessel). 25 At the same time, however, virtually any capacity for use as seagoing transportation--perhaps even the hypothetically plausible possibility has sufficed to lend the dignity of "vessel…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McCarthy v. The Bark Peking
Compare, e.g, Keller v. Dravo, 441 F.2d 1239, 1243-44 (5 Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 (1971) (floating drydock attached to dock and used as construction platform held not to be a vessel under LHWCA as a matter of law); Chahoc v. Hunt Shipyard, 431 F.2d 576, 577 (5 Cir.1970) (same), with Burks v. American River Transportation Co., supra, 679 F.2d at 71, 75 (non-propelled river barge held to be a vessel).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Edmund J. Flynn Co. v. LaVay
See, e. g., United States v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089, 1091 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972) (“[W]hen the client and attorney themselves, for purposes beneficial to the client, lift the veil [of attorney-client privilege], they cannot lower it again”, quoting United States v. Shivley, 112 F.Supp. 734, 742 (S.D.Cal.1953)); International Paper Co. v. Fibreboard Corp., 63 F.R.D. 88, 92 (D.Del.1974) (It would be “manifestly unfair” to allow one party to make factual assertions and then deny the other party “the foundation for those assert…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Pueblo of San Ildefonso
See e.g., Iowa Tribe of the Iowa Reservation in Kansas and Nebraska v. United States, 195 Ct. Cl. 365 (1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 (1972); Six Nations, supra; Sac and Fox Tribe of Indians, supra. However, this court has acknowledged, on several occasions, that two or more tribes or groups might inhabit a region in joint and amicable possession without destroying the “exclusive” nature of their use and occupancy, and without defeating Indian title.
Melton
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 71-509.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 10, 1972.
Published
Citer courts: D. New Jersey (1)
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.