green
Positive treatment
2.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1966 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1966
1996
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Towe v. Martinson
See Suhl v. Bumb, 348 F.2d 869, 873 (9th Cir.1965), cert. denied 382 U.S. 938 , 86 S.Ct. 388 , 15 L.Ed.2d 349 (1965).
cited
Cited "see"
4 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1197, 5 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 570 United States of America v. Jose Esteban Cambindo Valencia, Jose Manuel Escobar Orjuella, Federico Gonzalez, Alfonso Velasco, Mario Caicedo, Edgar Enrique Moreno Ortiz, Julio Francisco Bermudez Prado, Rafael Flores Valencia, Carmen Vivas, Freddie Williams, Jesus Losada, and Rosalinda Losada
See United States v. Pardo-Bolland, 348 F.2d 316, 324 (2d Cir.), Cert. denied, 382 U.S. 944 , 86 S.Ct. 388 , 15 L.Ed.2d 353 (1965). 172 5.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Valencia
See United States v. Pardo-Bolland, 348 F.2d 316, 324 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 944 , 86 S.Ct. 388 , 15 L.Ed.2d 353 (1965). 5.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mina Wright v. James Yackley
See Martens v. Winder, 341 F.2d 197, 199 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 937 , 86 S.Ct. 391 , 15 L.Ed.2d 349 (1965); Swanson Painting Co. v. Painters Local No. 200, 391 F.2d 523, 524 (9th Cir. 1968). 3 .
cited
Cited "see"
California Clippers, Inc. v. United States Soccer Football Ass'n
See Martens v. Winder, 341 F.2d 197, 199 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. den., 382 U.S. 937 , 86 S.Ct. 391 , 15 L.Ed.2d 349 (1965).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Kaminsky
See generally, United States v. Pardo-Bolland, 229 F.Supp. 473, 475 (S.D.N.Y.1964), aff’d, 348 F.2d 316 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 944 , 86 S.Ct. 388 , 15 L.Ed.2d 353 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Birrell
See, e.g., United States v. Pardo-Bolland, 229 F.Supp. 473, 478 (S.D.N.Y.1964), aff’d 348 F.2d 316 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 944 , 86 S.Ct. 388 , 15 L.Ed.2d 353 (1965); Conti v. Morgenthau, 232 F.Supp. 1004 (S.D.N.Y. 1964).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
v.
Overstreet
v.
Overstreet
No. 505.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 6, 1965.
Donald L. Holloioell, Robert L. Carter and Maria L. Marcus for petitioners., Hugh P. Futrell, Jr., for respondent.
Published
Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari granted limited to Question 2 presented by the petition which reads as follows:
“2. Has petitioner National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, a New York corporation, been deprived of its property without due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment by being held liable in damages for acts performed without its knowledge and by persons beyond its control?”