green
Positive treatment
4.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1957 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1957
1991
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Russell v. GAF Corp.
But see Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32 , 247 F.2d 23 , cert. denied, 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957) (danger that elastic exerciser would snap and put out an eye need not be warned against, because danger is both remote and obvious to user).
cited
Cited "see"
Brown v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
See Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 247 F.2d 23, 28 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957).
discussed
Cited "see"
Turner v. American Motors General Corp.
(2×)
See Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32, 34 , 247 F.2d 23, 25 , cert. denied, 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957); see also Restatement (Second) of Torts § 398 (1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Edna Bonfilio Carlson, Administratrix of the Estate of John D. Bonfilio v. American Safety Equipment Corporation
See Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32 , 247 F.2d 23, 26-27 , cert. denied, 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957).
discussed
Cited "see"
Frank Borowicz v. Chicago Mastic Company, Frank Borowicz v. Chicago Adhesive Products Company
See the lengthy discussion on ‘foreseeability’ of injury to users of products in Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32 , 247 F.2d 23 (1957) cert. den. 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 . 2 .
discussed
Cited "see"
A. L. Brown v. General Motors Corporation
(2×)
See Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32 , 247 F.2d 23, 30 (1957), cert. den., 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Lenore Foman v. Elvira A. Davis
(2×)
See Aberlin v. Zisman, 1 Cir., 244 F.2d 620 , certiorari denied 1957, 355 U.S. 857 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 . 9 In regard to the contention that the district court abused its discretion in not allowing plaintiff's motions to vacate the judgment and amend her complaint, there is nothing presented by the record to show the circumstances which were before the district court for its consideration in ruling on the motions.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Raymond L. Sprankle, Cross-Appellee v. Bower Ammonia & Chemical Co., Cross-Appellant
Hobart v. Sohio Petroleum Co., 376 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir.1967), aff'g 255 F.Supp. 972 (N.D.Miss.1966) (applying Mississippi law); Buford v. Jitney Jungle Stores, 388 So.2d 146, 149 (Miss.1980) (owner of premises had no duty to warn electrician of danger already known to the electrician); Gordon v. Niagara Mach. & Tool Works, 574 F.2d 1182 , 1184 & app. (5th Cir.1978) (adopting memorandum opinion of federal district court in Mississippi); see also, e.g., Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 247 F.2d 23 (D.C.Cir)(en banc), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 855 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957); Garrett v. Nissen C…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Leonhard v. United States
See, e. g., Aberlin v. Zisman, 244 F.2d 620 (1st Cir.) (action by non-custodian father for abduction against child's maternal aunt and uncle dismissed, applying New York law, where aunt had been awarded temporary custody), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 857 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957); McGrady v. Rosenbaum, 62 Misc.2d 182 , 308 N.Y.S.2d 181 (Sup.Ct.N.Y.Co.1970) (where child's mother has legal custody, father has no cause of action against mother's parents for aiding mother in keeping child away from father), aff'd, 37 A.D.2d 917 , 324 N.Y.S.2d 876 (1st Dep't 1971).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Leonhard v. United States
See, e. g., Aberlin v. Zisman, 244 F.2d 620 (1st Cir.) (action by non-custodian father for abduction against child’s maternal aunt and uncle dismissed, applying New York law, where aunt had been awarded temporary custody), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 857 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957); McGrady v. Rosenbaum, 62 Misc.2d 182 , 308 N.Y.S.2d 181 (Sup.Ct.N.Y.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bremier v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
See, e. g., Jamieson v. Woodward & Lothrop, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 32 , 247 F.2d 23 , (D.C.Cir.) cert. denied, 355 U.S. 855 , 78 S.Ct. 84 , 2 L.Ed.2d 63 (1957) (manufacturer’s liability for alleged negligence determined by law of forum in which plaintiff sustained injuries; retailer’s liability for alleged breach of implied warranty determined by law of forum of •sale.) However, where, as in the instant case, suit is brought in the District of Columbia for wrongful death, the local law is that the court will not look to plaintiffs’ theory of liability to resolve the conflict of laws question…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jamieson
v.
Woodward & Lothrop
v.
Woodward & Lothrop
No. 370.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 21, 1957.
Smith W. Brookhart, Ralph E. Becker, Benjamin H. Dorsey and Irving G. McCann for petitioners. Richard W. Galiher and William E. Stewart, Jr. for Helena Rubinstein, Inc., respondent.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.