green
Positive treatment
8.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1949 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1949
1987
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "see"
Hay Grp. Mgmt., Inc. v. Schneider
(3×)
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc. , 166 F.2d 127 (3d Cir. 1947), cert . denied , 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948).
discussed
Cited "see"
Breneman v. Tanner
See Hartmann v. Time, 334 U.S. 838 (1948) (a plaintiff who is a nonresident of Massachusetts will have the statute of limitations run against him as though he were a resident of Massachusetts from the time the cause of action accrued).
examined
Cited "see"
Tamari v. Bache & Co.
(3×)
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127, 139 (3d Cir.1947), cert. denied, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948); IB Moore's Federal Practice 110.409[7.-l], at 344 (2d ed. 1984); cf. Harl v. LaSalle, 679 F.2d 123 , 126 & n. 5 (7th Cir.1928) (implying in dictum that an ambiguous dismissal precludes application of res judicata). b.
examined
Cited "see"
Richard M. Patch v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc. And Frank Browning
(6×)
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127, 132 (3d Cir. 1947), cert. denied, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948).
examined
Cited "see"
Johnston v. Time, Inc.
(3×)
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 3 Cir., 166 F.2d 127 , 1 A.L.R.2d 370 , cert. den. 334 U. S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 .” 138 S.E.2d at 807-808 .
examined
Cited "see"
In re Standard Gas & Electric Co.
(3×)
See cases cited in footnote 16. . 72 F.Supp. 767 (E.D.N.Y.1947), aff’d sub nom., Public Service Commission of N. Y. v. SEC, 166 F.2d 784 (C.A.2), cert. den., 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948). . 153 F.2d 27, 29 (C.A.2), cert. den., 328 U.S. 860 , 66 S.Ct. 1350 , 90 L.Ed. 1630 (1946). .
examined
Cited "see"
Provident Tradesmens Bank And Trust Company v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company
(3×)
See Semmel, Collateral Estoppel, Mutuality and Joinder of Parties, 68 Colum.L.Rev. 1457, 1468-71 (1968) 19 See Semmel, supra, at p. 1457 20 See Semmel, supra, pp. 1471 et seq 21 Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127, 138 , 1 A.L.R.2d 370 (3 Cir. 1947), cert. denied 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948).
cited
Cited "see"
Sizemore v. Maroney
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F. 2d 127 , 1 A.L.R. 2d 370 , cert. den. 334 U.S. 838 , 92 L. ed. 1763.
examined
Cited "see"
Harold Noel Arrowsmith, Jr. v. United Press International
(6×)
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127, 133 (3 Cir. 1947), cert. denied, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948); Brewster v. Boston Herald Traveler Con)., 188 F.Supp. 565, 560, 577 (D.
examined
Cited "see"
Tocco v. Time, Inc.
(3×)
See, for example, Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 3 Cir., 1948, 166 F. 2d 127 , 1 A.L.R.2d 370 , certiorari denied 1948, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 . 4 If I were to follow this holding it would simply mean that, notwithstanding the adoption of the “single publication” rule, the forum state court would be required to hear part of a nation-wide defamation action.
examined
Cited "see"
Schetter v. United States
(3×)
See Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 3 Cir., 166 F.2d 127, 138 , 1 A.L.R.2d 370 , certiorari denied, 1948, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (res judicata); Continental Collieries, Inc., v. Shober, 3 Cir., 1942, 130 F.2d 631, 635-636 (statute of frauds); Victory v. Manning, 3 Cir., 1942, 128.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cornell Storefront Systems, Inc. v. MobilFlex Inc.
Acad. of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 470 U.S. 373, 380 (1985) (“The preclusive effect of a state court judgment in a subsequent federal lawsuit |generally is determined by the full faith and credit statute, which . . . directs a | federal court to refer to the preclusion law of the State in which judgment was | rendered.”); see also Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127, 138 (3d Cir. 1947), cert. denied, 334 U.S. 838 (1948) (recognizing the preclusive effect of two prior judgments, including one rendered by a state court).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College
(3×)
See, e.g., Williams v. Murdoch, 330 F.2d 745, 749 (3d Cir.1964) (affirmative defense of res judicata properly raised in motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)) (citing Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127 , 131 n. 3 (3d Cir.1947), cert. denied, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948)). 79 Although the College did not assert the defense of immunity under the Act in its answer, it did raise this defense in paragraph nine of its motion for summary judgment.
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College
(3×)
See, e.g., Williams v. Murdoch, 330 F.2d 745, 749 (3d Cir.1964) (affirmative defense of res judicata properly raised in motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)) (citing Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 166 F.2d 127 , 131 n. 3 (3d Cir.1947), cert. denied, 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 (1948)).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Mattox v. News Syndicate Co.
(6×)
Compare Hartmann v. Time, Inc., 3 Cir., 166 F.2d 127 , certiorari denied 334 U.S. 838 , 68 S.Ct. 1495 , 92 L.Ed. 1763 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Time, Inc.
v.
Hartmann
v.
Hartmann
No. 774.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 7, 1948.
Wm. Dwight Whitney and Francis H. Scheetz for petitioner.
Cited by 5 opinions | Published
C. C. A. 3d. Certiorari denied.