green
Positive treatment
1.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Omark Industries, Inc. v. The Carlton Company and Raymond Carlton
A defendant who raises the defense of “prior public use” has the initial burden of establishing the facts that would call that defense into play by “substantial evidence” which is “clear and satisfactory”. 9 *787 Tucker Aluminum Products Inc. v. Grossman, 312 F.2d 293, 294 (9th Cir. 1963); see Amerio Contact Plate Freezers, Inc. v. Belt-Ice Corp., 316 F.2d 459 , 462 n.7 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 902 , 84 S.Ct. 191 , 11 L.Ed.2d 143 (1963).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
The Robbins Company v. Lawrence Manufacturing Company
Tucker Aluminum Products, Inc. v. Grossman (9 Cir. 1963) 312 F.2d 293 , 295; see also Amerio Contact Plate Freezers, Inc. v. Belt-Ice Corp. (9 Cir. 1963) 316 F.2d 459, 465 , cert. denied, 375 U.S. 902 , 84 S.Ct. 191 , 11 L.Ed.2d 143 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Federal Power Commission
v.
Texaco Inc.
v.
Texaco Inc.
No. 386.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 12, 1963.
Solicitor General Cox, Richard A. Solomon and Peter H. Schiff for petitioner. Alfred C. DeCrane, Jr. and Paul F. Schlicher for Texaco Inc., and William J. Grove, Thomas H. Wall, Carroll L. Gilliam, W. W. Heard and Wm. H. Emerson for Pan American Petroleum Corp., respondents.
Published
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted.