City of Detroit v. Socomet, Inc., 404 U.S. 1024 (1972). · Go Syfert
City of Detroit v. Socomet, Inc., 404 U.S. 1024 (1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the communications between defendant and were not privileged, since third persons were present at the time the communications were made.”
77 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 43 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Zolp (njd, 1987-04-30) · Strongest negative: Director General of India Supply Mission ex rel. President of Union of India v. Maru (ca2, 1972-04-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1972 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1972 1999 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" Director General of India Supply Mission ex rel. President of Union of India v. Maru
2d Cir. · 1972 · signal: but see · confidence high
Although the Pennsylvania rule is not now limited to collision cases, In re Seaboard Shipping Corp., 449 F.2d 132 , 136 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied Seaboard Shipping Corp. v. Moran Inland Waterways Corp., 406 U.S. 949 , 92 S.Ct. 2038 , 32 L.Ed.2d 337 ; 406 U.S. 949 , 92 S.Ct. 2039 , 32 L.Ed.2d 337 (1972); but see Wilkins v. American Export Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc., 446 F.2d 480, 485-486 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1018 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972), we are not inclined to apply it here.
discussed Cited "but see" Director General Of The India Supply Mission v. S.S. Maru
2d Cir. · 1972 · signal: but see · confidence high
While this finding is supportable, we cannot agree that the Pennsylvania rule is applicable. 19 Although the Pennsylvania rule is not now limited to collision cases, In re Seaboard Shipping Corp., 449 F.2d 132 , 136 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied Seaboard Shipping Corp. v. Moran Inland Waterways Corp., 406 U.S. 949 , 92 S.Ct. 2038 , 32 L.Ed.2d 337 ; 406 U.S. 949 , 92 S.Ct. 2039 , 32 L.Ed.2d 337 (1972); but see Wilkins v. American Export Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc., 446 F.2d 480, 485-486 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1018 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972), we are not inclined to apply i…
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Zolp
D.N.J. · 1987 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
the communications between defendant and were not privileged, since third persons were present at the time the communications were made.
cited Cited "see" Blackwell v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
S.D. Miss. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Keller v. Dravo Corporation, 441 F.2d 1239, 1245 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
cited Cited "see" Ricardo N., Inc. v. Turcios De Argueta
Tex. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wilkins v. American Export Isbrandtsen Lines, 446 F.2d 480, 484 (2d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1018 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
discussed Cited "see" Boucher v. McGovern
R.I. · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1241-42 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972). *1379 Additionally, although the right of access to the courts is an aspect of the right to petition the government, California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508, 510, 513 , 92 S.Ct. 609, 612, 613 , 30 L.Ed.2d 642, 646, 648 (1972), such right does not entail absolute authorization to assert any possible type of claim.
discussed Cited "see" Brookings v. State
Fla. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir.1971) (waiver of the privilege when alleged privileged communication between former attorney and client was made in the presence of trial counsel and government attorneys), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." DiGiovanni v. Traylor Bros., Inc.
D.R.I. · 1993 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, e.g., Kathriner, 975 F.2d at 662-63 ; Ducrepont, 877 F.2d at 396 ; Davis v. Cargill, Inc., 808 F.2d 361, 362 (5th Cir.1986); see also Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1244 (5th Cir.1971) (dry dock used for ship repair is not a vessel when moored), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972); Chahoc v. Hunt Shipyard, 431 F.2d 576 , 577 (5th Cir.1970) (floating dry dock is not a vessel when moored and operated as a dry dock), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 982 , 91 S.Ct. 1198 , 28 L.Ed.2d 333 (1971).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Company, Inc. v. C.N. Lloyd Brasileiro, the Hartford Insurance Company of Alabama, in Personam
11th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Keller v. Dravo Corp., 441 F.2d 1239, 1244 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972) (although court did not preclude finding that floating drydock could be vessel under different facts, court here found as a matter of law that floating drydock was not a “vessel"); Bernardo v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 314 F.2d 604, 608 (2d Cir.1963) (jury properly decided that floating drydock was not “vessel” within the meaning of Jones Act), Floating drydocks have been classified as “vessels” for admiralty purposes when they become active some way in …
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Garza v. State
Tex. App. · 1985 · signal: see also · confidence low
For a good discussion of this general rule and its underlying policy considerations as applied by the federal courts, see U.S. v. Hockridge, 573 F.2d 752 (2nd Cir.1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 821 , 99 S.Ct. 85 , 58 L.Ed.2d 112 (1978); U.S. v. Grieco, 261 F.2d 414 (2nd Cir.1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 907 , 79 S.Ct. 582 , 3 L.Ed.2d 572 (1959); See also U.S. v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Edmund J. Flynn Co. v. LaVay
D.C. · 1981 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., United States v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089, 1091 (5th Cir.1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017 , 92 S.Ct. 679 , 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972) (“[W]hen the client and attorney themselves, for purposes beneficial to the client, lift the veil [of attorney-client privilege], they cannot lower it again”, quoting United States v. Shivley, 112 F.Supp. 734, 742 (S.D.Cal.1953)); International Paper Co. v. Fibreboard Corp., 63 F.R.D. 88, 92 (D.Del.1974) (It would be “manifestly unfair” to allow one party to make factual assertions and then deny the other party “the foundation for those assert…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
City of Detroit
v.
Socomet, Inc.
No. 71-532.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 10, 1972.
404 U.S. 1024

Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.