Westervelt v. Istokpoga Consol. Subdrainage Dist., 341 U.S. 929 (1951). · Go Syfert
Search
Westervelt v. Istokpoga Consol. Subdrainage Dist., 341 U.S. 929 (1951). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
69 citation events across 28 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Francis J. Quinn, Steam-Path Sales, Inc. And Steam-Path Services, Inc. v. Gulf and Western Corporation D/B/A Mal Tool and Engineering Company (ca2, 1981-03-11)
Treatment trajectory · 1951 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1951 1988 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Francis J. Quinn, Steam-Path Sales, Inc. And Steam-Path Services, Inc. v. Gulf and Western Corporation D/B/A Mal Tool and Engineering Company
2d Cir. · 1981 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Mitchell v. Flintkote Co., 185 F.2d 1008 (2d Cir. 1951), cert. denied, 341 U.S. 931 , 71 S.Ct. 804 , 95 L.Ed. 1361 (1951); Bradley v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp., 159 F.2d 39 (2d Cir. 1947), aff’g 6 F.R.D. 37 (S.D.N.Y.1946); Weitzel v. Brown-Neil Corp., 251 F.2d 661 (4th Cir. 1958). 41 U.S.C. § 254 (a) states that negotiated government contracts shall contain a suitable warranty ... by the contractor that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure such contract upon an *93 agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage…
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States of America Ex Rel. Ronald James Dessus v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
3rd Cir. · 1971 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also McGarty v. O’Brien, 188 F.2d 151 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 341 U.S. 928 , 71 S.Ct. 794 , 95 L.Ed. 1359 (1951).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Westervelt
v.
Istokpoga Consolidated Subdrainage District
No. 648.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 14, 1951.
341 U.S. 929
D. C. Hull, Erskine W. Landis, John L. Graham and J. Compton French for appellant. O. K. Reaves, David E. Ward and Doyle E. Carlton for appellees.
Published

Appeal from the Supreme Court of Florida. Per Curiam: The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question.