green
Positive treatment
3.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1952 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1952
1989
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Breslin v. Maritime Overseas Corp.
See Livanos v. Peteras, 192 F.2d 319, 321 (4th Cir.1951), cert. denied, 343 U.S. 950 , 72 S.Ct. 1042 , 96 L.Ed. 1352 (1952) (“inadvertent clerical mistake” establishes sufficient cause for delay in payment of overtime wages); Kalantzis v. Mesar, 132 F.Supp. 745, 750 (E.D.Va.1955), aff'd, 245 F.2d 705 (4th Cir.1957) (same).
discussed
Cited "see"
Zonver v. Superior Court
We conclude, therefore, that as to each of the questions, it was ‘ evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it [was] asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it [could not] be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure would result, ’ Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S., at 486-487, 95 L.Ed., at 1124 [ 71 S.Ct. 814 ]; see Singleton v. United States, 343 U.S. 944 , 96 L.Ed. 1349 , 72 S.Ct. 1041 .” (378 U.S. at pp. 13-14 [12 L.Ed.2d at pp. 662-663].
discussed
Cited "see"
Billy George Andrews v. United States
(2×)
See, for example, United States v. Furlong, 7 Cir., 1952, 194 F.2d 1 , cert. den'd 343 U.S. 950 , 72 S.Ct. 1042 , 96 L.Ed. 1352 (given after three hours' deliberation); United States v. Samuel Dunkel & Co., 2 Cir., 1949, 173 F.2d 506 (given after 12 hours of deliberation); Burton v. United States, 196 U.S. 283, 305 , 25 S.Ct. 243 , 49 L.Ed. 482 (1905) (given after 38 hours of deliberation). 18 The jury's hurry to return indicates to me that the jurors did not understand their duty to deliberate patiently and in accordance with their conscientious convictions.
discussed
Cited "see"
Margot Von Opel v. Uebersee Finanz Korporation, A. G. Liestal, Switzerland
(2×)
See Berger v. Ruoff, 90 U.S.App.D.C. 276 , 195 F.2d 775 , certiorari denied Berger v. McGrath, 343 U.S. 950 , 72 S.Ct. 1041 , 96 L.Ed. 1352 . 4 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Turney
v.
Home Insurance Co.
v.
Home Insurance Co.
No. 673.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 12, 1952.
Petitioner pro se. Joseph J. Biunno, John W. Ansell and Charles B. Niebling for respondent.
Published
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.