green
Positive treatment
5.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1962 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1962
1994
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
cited
Cited "but see"
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Radiation Technology, Inc.
But see United States v. Vulcanized Rubber & Plastics Co., 288 F.2d 257 , 258-59 n. 2 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 38 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
Leonhard v. United States
See generally Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
Leonhard v. United States
See generally Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80 (2d Cir.), cert.denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
Ashland Oil Co. v. Union Oil Co.
See Moviecolor, Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961). .
cited
Cited "see"
David Weinberger, on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Retail Credit Company
See Moviecolor Limited v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80, 87-88 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corporation, Manhattan-Ward, Incorporated v. Grinnell Corporation, 1225 Vine Street Building, Inc. v. Grinnell Corporation
See Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Company, 288 F.2d 80, 87 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. JB Williams Company, Inc.
See notes 7 and 8 supra. That case is United States v. Vulcanized Rubber & Plastics Company, 178 F.Supp. 723 (E.D.Pa.1959), aff’d, 288 F.2d 257 (3d Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 38 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
William Ortiz v. J. Edwin Lavallee, as Agents of the State of New York
See Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80, 83 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961). *915 in.
discussed
Cited "see"
Saylor v. Lindsley
See Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80 (2d Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 ; Janigan v. Taylor, 344 F.2d 781, 784 (1st Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 879 , 86 S.Ct. 163 , 15 L.Ed.2d 120 ; Tobacco & Allied Stocks v. Transamerica Corp., supra 143 F.Supp. at 328 and 329.
discussed
Cited "see"
Middle Atlantic Utilities Co. v. S. M. W. Development Corp.
DeLuca v. Atlantic Refining Co., 176 F.2d 421, 424 (2 Cir. 1949), cert. denied, 338 U.S. 943 , 70 S.Ct. 423 , 94 L.Ed. 581 (1950); see, Moviecolor Limited v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80 , 90 A.L.R.2d 252 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
discussed
Cited "see"
Saylor v. Lindsley
See Moviecolor Limited v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80 , 90 A.L.R.2d 252 (2d Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961); Tobacco & Allied Stocks, Inc. v. Transamerica Corp., 143 F.Supp. 323, 328-329 (D.Del.1956), aff’d 244 F.2d 902 (3d Cir. 1957); 3 Loss, Securities Regulation p. 1776.
discussed
Cited "see"
Ohio Valley Electric Corp. v. General Electric Co.
See Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80, 87 , 90 A.L.R.2d 252 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961): Even if no affimative act of concealment is required in restraint of trade conspiracy cases, see Dawson [Fraudulent Concealment and Statutes of Limitation, 31 Mich.L.Rev. 875 (1933)] at 880, 907-08; American Tobacco Co. v. People’s Tobacco Co. [ 204 Fed. 58 (5th Cir. 1913)]; cf. 63 Harv.L.Rev. at 1221, in contrast to the usual rule when there is no fiduciary relationship, a point we do not decide * * *.
cited
Cited "see"
Donald A. Swan v. Board of Higher Education of the City of New York by Gustave G. Rosenberg, Its Chairman, George A. Pierson, and Margaret v. Kiely
See Movie-color, Limited v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80, 86-88 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
Cinnamon v. Abner A. Wolf, Inc.
See Judge Friendly’s excellent discussion of this point in Moviecolor Limited v. Eastman Kodak Co. (C.A.2, 1961), 288 F.2d 80 , cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 .
cited
Cited "see"
Atlantic City Electric Co. v. General Electric Co.
See Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80, 88 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed. 2d 26 (1961).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Carbone v. Gulf Oil Corp.
See, e.g., Moviecolor Limited v Eastman Kodak Co. 288 F2d 80, 83 (CA2), cert. denied, 368 US 821 , 7 L Ed 2d 26 , 82 S Ct 39 (1961); Fulton v. Loew’s Inc. 114 F Supp 676, 678-682 (Kans 1953); Electric Theater Co. v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 113 F Supp 937, 941-942 , (WD Mo 1953); Wolf Sales Co. v. Rudolph Wurlitzer Co. 105 F Supp 506, 509 (Colo 1952).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sentry Corporation and Sne Corporation v. Ethel R. Harris, as Trustee Under Trust Agreement Dated March 1, 1973
See, e.g., Moviecolor, Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F.2d 80, 83-84 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 39 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961); see also Hobson v. Wilson, 737 F.2d 1 , 33 & n. 100 (D.C.Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 1843 , 85 L.Ed.2d 142 (1985); cf. Burnett v. New York Central R.R., 380 U.S. 424, 435 , 85 S.Ct. 1050, 1058 , 13 L.Ed.2d 941 (1965) (adopting uniform tolling rule in FELA action).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ivy Rogers v. Unionmutual Stock Life Insurance Company of America v. John Wilson Vargo, of the Estate of Barbara Ann Vargo Rogers, Deceased
Miller, 81 Wash.2d at 312 , 501 P.2d at 1069 ; see also Weed v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, 288 F.2d 463, 465 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 40 , 7 L.Ed.2d 27 (1961).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wilson v. Garcia
(2×)
See, e. g., Moviecolor Limited v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F. 2d 80, 83 (CA2), cert. denied, 368 U. S. 821 (1961); Fulton v. Loew's Inc., 114 F. Supp. 676, 678-682 (Kan. 1953); Electric Theater Co. v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 113 F. Supp. 937, 941-942 , (WD Mo. 1953); Wolf Sales Co. v. Rudolf Wurlitzer Co., 105 F. Supp. 506, 509 (Colo. 1952). [20] See also 383 U. S., at 709 (WHITE, J., dissenting) ("[T]he cases also establish that the silence of Congress is not to be read as automatically putting an imprimatur on state law.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.
(2×)
See also Moviecolor, Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 288 F. 2d 80 (CA2), cert. denied, 368 U. S. 821 (1961).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
David Rettinger v. Federal Trade Commission
See, e. g., United States v. Vulcanized Rubber & Plastics Co., 288 F.2d 257 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 821 , 82 S.Ct. 38 , 7 L.Ed.2d 26 (1961); Vulcanized Rubber & Plastics Co. v. FTC, 103 U.S.App.D.C. 384 , 258 F.2d 684 (D.C.Cir.1958); Austern, Five Thousand Dollars A Day, 21 A.B.A.
Vulcanized Rubber & Plastics Co.
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 133.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 9, 1961.
Donald E. Van Koughnet and William F. Heefner for petitioner. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger, Richard A. Solomon, Patrick M. Ryan, James Mcl. Henderson and PGad B. Morehouse for the United States.
Published
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.