green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
8.2 score
“once admiralty jurisdiction is established, then all of the substantive rules and precepts peculiar to the law of the sea become applicable”
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 20 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Evergreen Marine Corp. v. Six Consignments of Frozen Scallops
once admiralty jurisdiction is established, then all of the substantive rules and precepts peculiar to the law of the sea become applicable
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Santone v. Fischer
Id., at 693 , 104 S.Ct. 34 2052. 35 Richter, 131 S. Ct. at 791-92 (emphases ours). 23 1 We see no basis in the present case for a conclusion that the decision of the state court 2 on the § 440.10 motion was an erroneous or unreasonable application of either prong of Strickland. 3 Lee's testimony on Count 6 was that at a jail church service Irwin made a "slitting of the throat" 4 gesture and mouthed "snitches get stitches"--the same phrase, we note, that the witness Young 5 testified Irwin had used in explaining his attack on Smalls.
cited
Cited "see"
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Torrefaccion Cafe Cialitos, Inc.
See Austin v. Unarco Indus., Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 4-5 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Two Appeals Arising Out of the San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation
See Austin v. Unarco Indus., Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 4 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983); see generally In re Western Real Estate Fund, Inc., 922 F.2d 592 , 600 (10th Cir.1990), modified on other grounds, 932 F.2d 898 (10th Cir.1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Trimec, Inc. v. Zale Corp.
See Austin v. Unarco Industries, 705 F.2d 1, 4 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983); Williford v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc., 715 F.2d 124, 126-27 (4th Cir.1983); Lynch v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 710 F.2d 1194, 1196-97 (6th Cir.1983); Pitts v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 698 F.2d 313, 314 (7th Cir.1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Barbara Butler v. American Trawler Company, Inc.
See Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 , 6 n. 1 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Butler v. American Trawler Co., Inc.
See Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 , 8 n. 3 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Margaret Austin, Etc. v. Raymark Industries, Inc.
See Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Garland Coal & Mining Company v. United Mine Workers of America, District 21, United Mine Workers of America Local 1285, United Mine Workers of America Local 1329, United Mine Workers of America Local 2071, United Mine Workers of America Local 2428, United Mine Workers of America v. Toltec Coal Company and Great Western Enterprises, Inc. Garland Coal & Mining Company v. United Mine Workers of America District 21, United Mine Workers of America Local 1285, United Mine Workers of America Local 1329, United Mine Workers of America Local 2071, United Mine Workers of America Local 2428, United Mine Workers of America, Toltec Coal Company and Great Western Enterprises, Inc. Garland Coal & Mining Company v. United Mine Workers of America District 21, United Mine Workers of America Local 1285, United Mine Workers of America Local 1329, United Mine Workers of America Local 2071, United Mine Workers of America Local 2428, United Mine Workers of America v. Toltec Coal Company and Great Western Enterprises, Inc
See Austin v. UNARCO Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 5 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Garland Coal & Mining Co. v. United Mine Workers of America
See Austin v. UNARCO Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 5 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Computer Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Qantel Corporation, Computer Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Qantel Corporation
(2×)
McPhail v. Municipality of Culebra, 598 F.2d 603, 607 (1st Cir.1979); see Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 15 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983); Gundy v. United States, 728 F.2d 484, 488 (10th Cir.1984); Herman v. Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp., 524 F.2d 767, 772 (3d Cir.1975).
cited
Cited "see"
Jay W. Myhran v. Johns-Manville Corporation, and Fibreboard Corporation and Raymark Industries, Inc.
See Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 , 10 n. 4, 12 n. 5 (1st Gir.), cert. dismissed, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maritime Electric Company, Inc., a New York Corporation v. United Jersey Bank, a New Jersey Banking Corporation Michael Gill and Maritime Electric Company, Inc., a New Jersey Corporation. Michael Gill, Third-Party v. Maritime Electric Company, Inc., a New York Corporation Thomas Gill, Individually and in His Capacity as President of Maritime Electric Company, Inc., (n.y.), Third-Party Maritime Electric Co., Inc., (Plaintiff and Third-Party Defendant) and Thomas Gill (Third-Party Defendant)
See also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 4-5 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983); Teachers Ins. & Annuity Ass'n. v. Butler, 803 F.2d at 65; Williford v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 715 F.2d 124 , 126-27 (4th Cir.1983); Wedgeworth v. Fibreboard Corp., 706 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir.1983); Clay v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 722 F.2d 1289, 1290-91 (6th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1253 , 104 S.Ct. 3537 , 82 L.Ed.2d 842 (1984); Pitts v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 698 F.2d 313, 314 (7th Cir.1983); Fortier v. Dona Anna Plaza Partners, 7…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maritime Electric Co. v. United Jersey Bank
See also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 4-5 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983); Teachers Ins. & Annuity Ass’n. v. Butler, 803 F.2d at 65; Williford v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 715 F.2d 124 , 126-27 (4th Cir.1983); Wedgeworth v. Fibreboard Corp., 706 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir.1983); Clay v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 722 F.2d 1289, 1290-91 (6th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1253 , 104 S.Ct. 3537 , 82 L.Ed.2d 842 (1984); Pitts v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 698 F.2d 313, 314 (7th Cir.1983); Fortier v. Dona Anna Plaza Partners…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dean v. State
See also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 , 6 n. 1 (1st Cir.1983), cert. den. 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed 2d 1454 (1983); Harville v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., 731 F.2d 775, 779 (11th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thomas Carey v. Bahama Cruise Lines
See United States v. Reliable Transfer Co., 421 U.S. 397, 407 , 95 S.Ct. 1708, 1713 , 44 L.Ed.2d 251 (1975); Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 358 U.S. 625, 629 , 79 S.Ct. 406, 409 , 3 L.Ed.2d 550 (1959); see also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1, 5-6 (1st Cir.) (involving a similar claim), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Terry May v. Transworld Drilling Co.
Id. at 1012; see also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983). 27 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mildred v. Drake v. Raymark Industries, Inc., and Third-Party Mildred v. Drake v. Raymark Industries, Inc., and Third-Party Bath Iron Works Corporation, Third-Party
The Court concluded that a showing of a "relationship of the wrong to traditional maritime activity is often more sensible and more consonant with the purposes of maritime law than is a purely mechanical application of the locality test." Id. 409 U.S. at 261 , 93 S.Ct. at 501 ; see also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Drake v. Raymark Industries, Inc.
The Court concluded that a showing of a “relationship of the wrong to traditional maritime activity is often more sensible and more consonant with the purposes of maritime law than is a purely mechanical application of the locality test.” Id. 409 U.S. at 261 , 93 S.Ct. at 501 ; see also Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc., 705 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 463 U.S. 1247 , 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re All Asbestos Cases
See also, Austin v. Unarco Indus., Inc., 705 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 34 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1454 (1983); Keene Corp. v. United States, 700 F.2d 836, 844 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 195 , 78 L.Ed.2d 171 (1983).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation
v.
Wold Engineering, P.C.
v.
Wold Engineering, P.C.
No. 82-629.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Sep 8, 1983.
Published
Citer courts: First Circuit (1)
Sup. Ct. N. D. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 904.] Motions of Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North and South Dakota et al. and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.