green
Positive treatment
4.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1960 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1960
1993
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Richard Abernathy v. Southern California Edison
See Rogers v. Schering Corp., 262 F.2d 180, 182 (3d Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 991 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 (1959).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cts Corporation v. Piher International Corporation and Piher Sociedad Anonima
(2×)
See Darlington v. Studebaker-Packard Corp., 261 F.2d 903, 905 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 992 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 (1959); see generally Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc. v. Hughes Aircraft Co., 73 F.R.D. 16 (D.Del.1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Peter F. Clark, as President of Ice Cream Drivers and Employees Union Local 757, Etc. v. Kraftco Corporation
See Rogers v. Schering Corp., 262 F.2d 180, 182 (3d Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Hexagon Laboratories, Inc. v. Rogers, 359 U.S. 991 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed. 980 (1959). 3 As Judge Tyler has retained jurisdiction over this suit and further action by him on the merits is necessary, the order appealed from is one made in the course of a continuing litigation.
cited
Cited "see"
Chatham Shipping Company, Warwick Corporation and Tsakalotos Navigation Corp., Libelants-Appellees v. Fertex Steamship Corporation
See 243 F.2d at 345, n. 3, and Judge Maris’ opinion in Rogers v. Schering Corp., 262 F.2d 180 (3 Cir.), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 991 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 (1959).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Errington
See State v. Errington, Mo.Sup., 317 S.W.2d 326 , certiorari denied 359 U.S. 992 , 79 S.Ct. 1122 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Illinois Central Gulf Railroad v. J & L Contractors, Inc.
(2×)
Compare Darlington v. Studebaker-Packard Corp., 261 F.2d 903, 904-06 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 992 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 (1959) (local rule providing for court’s sua sponte dismissal of case based upon plaintiff’s failure to prosecute held not inconsistent with Rule 41).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Robert Lepkowski v. United States Department of the Treasury
(2×)
See, e.g., Darlington v. Studebaker-Packard Corp., 261 F.2d 903, 905-06 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 992 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 (1959); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421,1423-25 (9th Cir.1986). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brandon v. Hines
(2×)
See, e.g., Rogers v. Schering Corp., 262 F.2d 180, 182 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 991 , 79 S.Ct. 1121 , 3 L.Ed.2d 980 (1959); Farr & Co. v. Cia.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Darlington
v.
Studebaker-Packard Corp.
v.
Studebaker-Packard Corp.
No. 815.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 18, 1959.
Owen W. Crumpacker for petitioner., Wayne B. Easton for respondent.
Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.