green
Positive treatment
3.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1966 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1966
1996
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Sopcak v. Northern Mountain Helicopter Services
See Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 341 F.2d 851, 855 (2d Cir.) (discussing jurisdictional requirements of Article 28), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Air Disaster at Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988. Denice H. Rein v. Pan American World Airways Incorporated, in Re Hijacking of Pan American World Airways, Inc. Aircraft at Karachi International Airport, Pakistan on September 5, 1986. Dilip Joshi, Nadya Hussain, Tahra Lodhi, Dilip Parikh, Faraidoon Oshtory v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.
See Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 341 F.2d 851, 855 (2d Cir.) ("The basic unit of international law is the nation-state and it is fair to assume, absent clear indications to the contrary, that [the Convention] was written with reference to nation-states, not to areas and subdivisions of nation-states."), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rein v. Pan American World Airways Inc.
See Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 341 F.2d 851, 855 (2d Cir.) (“The basic unit of international law is the nation-state and it is fair to assume, absent clear indications to the contrary, that [the Convention] was written with reference to nation-states, not to areas and subdivisions of nation-states.”), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Air Crash Disaster at Warsaw, Poland, Etc.
Lisi v. Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane, S.p.A., supra, 370 F.2d at 512 ; accord, Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 341 F.2d 851, 856 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965); Warren v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 234 F.Supp. 223 (S.D.Cal.1964), rev’d, 352 F.2d 494 (9th Cir. 1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Geveke & Co. International, Inc. v. Kompania Di Awa I Elektrisidat Di Korsou N.V.
See Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 341 F.2d 851, 856 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965); Sanborn v. United States, 453 F.Supp. 651, 654 (E.D.Cal.1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
John J. Demarines and Doris A. Demarines, Husband and Wife v. Klm Royal Dutch Airlines
See Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, 341 F.2d 851, 857 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965). 11 *1199 Assuming, however, that upon remand the defendant is able to introduce evidence supporting its assertion that the ticket was delivered, the question of who bears the burden of establishing delivery or non-delivery becomes significant.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Company, Ltd.
See also Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, 341 F.2d 851 , 858 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co.
See also Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, 341 F.2d 851, 858 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mainello
See, e. g., Tellier v. CIR, 342 F.2d 690 , 692 n. 3 (2d Cir. 1965) [cert. denied, 382 U.S. 817 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 63 ]; Mallory v. United States, [ 104 U.S.App.D.C. 71 ] 259 F.2d 801, 802 (1958); see generally A. Alexander, En Banc Hearings in the Federal Courts of Appeal : Accommodating Institutional Responsibilities, 40 N.Y.U.L.Rev. 562, 582 n. 120 (1965)”. 65 (461 at 235-236).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Edmund J. Smith v. Canadian Pacific Airways, Ltd.
Compare, e. g., Dunning v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 4 Av.Cas. 17,394 (D.D.C.1954) (judicial subdivision approach), with Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, Inc., 341 F.2d 851 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965) (national approach).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Sylvia Molitch, Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee v. Irish International Airlines, Defendant-Appellee-Appellant
See also Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line, 341 F.2d 851 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U. S. 816 , 86 S.Ct. 38 , 15 L.Ed.2d 64 (1965).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PRICE, Dba HOWARD PRICE & CO.
v.
STATE ROAD COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA Et Al.
v.
STATE ROAD COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA Et Al.
144.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 11, 1965.
Carney M. Layne and Charles W. Yeager for appellant., C. Donald Robertson, Attorney General of West Virginia, and Philip J. Grasiani and C. Robert Sarver, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.
Per Curiam.
Published
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed in light of the representations of the Attorney General of West Virginia that there is open to the appellant an effective state procedure of which he has not availed himself.