A. H. Bull S.S. Co. v. Seafarers' Int'l Union, 355 U.S. 932 (1958). · Go Syfert
Search
A. H. Bull S.S. Co. v. Seafarers' Int'l Union, 355 U.S. 932 (1958). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“most often the excited utterance, as a practical matter, relates to the exciting cause, i.e., description of an accident, an attack . . .”
107 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 48 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Santiago (mass, 2002-09-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958 1992 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Commonwealth v. Santiago
Mass. · 2002 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
most often the excited utterance, as a practical matter, relates to the exciting cause, i.e., description of an accident, an attack . . .
discussed Cited "see" Shuck v. Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc.
Ariz. Ct. App. · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See Murphy Auto Parts Co. v. Ball, 249 F.2d 508 , 512 (D.C.Cir. 1957) (holding that the declarant’s statement that he was on an errand for his employer was properly admitted as an excited utterance to prove that he was in fact engaged in his employer’s business at the time of a collision with a pedestrian), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 932 , 78 S.Ct. 413 , 2 L.Ed.2d 415 (1958).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Thomas N. Moore
7th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Murphy Auto Parts Co. v. Ball, 249 F.2d 508 , 511-12 (D.C.Cir.1957), ce rt. denied, 355 U.S. 932 , 78 S.Ct. 413 , 2 L.Ed.2d 415 (1958).
cited Cited "see" State v. Savant
Ariz. Ct. App. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See Murphy Auto Parts Co. v. Ball, 249 F.2d 508 (D.C.Cir.1957), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 932 , 78 S.Ct. 413 , 2 L.Ed.2d 415 (1958).
cited Cited "see" International Union of Electrical Workers v. General Electric Co.
Conn. · 1961 · signal: see · confidence high
See McCarroll v. Los Angeles County District Council of Carpenters, 49 Cal. 2d 45, 63, 64, 69 , 315 P.2d 322 , cert. denied, 355 U.S. 932 , 78 S. Ct. 413 , 2 L.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Harrell
Md. · 1997 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare People v. Burton, 433 Mich. 268 , 445 N.W.2d 133, 138 (1989) (noting a third requirement that the statement “ ‘must relate to the circumstances of the startling occasion’” in order for the excited utterance exception to apply) (quoting People v. Gee, 406 Mich. 279 , 278 N.W.2d 304, 305 (1979)) and State v. Terry, 10 Wash.App. 874 , 520 P.2d 1397, 1401 (1974)(noting that the statement must relate to the “main event,” or the subject of the lawsuit) with Murphy Auto Parts Co. v. Ball, 249 F.2d 508 , 511 (D.C.Cir.1957) (noting that “ ‘the relationship of the statement to th…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
A. H. Bull Steamship Co.
v.
Seafarers' International Union of North America, Atlantic and Gulf District, AFL-CIO
No. 665.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 27, 1958.
355 U.S. 932
James V. Hayes, Theodore S. Hope and Sidney P. Howell, Jr. for petitioner. Seymour W. Miller for the Seafarers’ International Union of North America, Atlantic and Gulf District, AFL-CIO, Lee Pressman for the National Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association, AFL-CIO, and Marvin Schwartz for the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Inc., AFL-CIO, respondents.
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 81%
Citer courts: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial… (1)

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.