green
Positive treatment
11.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Smith v. State
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929, 934 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
cited
Cited "see"
Topa Equities (V.I.) Ltd. v. Bared Jewelers of the V.I., Inc.
See Smith v. Government of the Virgin Islands, 4 V.I. 496 , 329 F.2d 135 (3d Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S. Ct. 1886 , 12 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Carrasquillo
See the discussion and references in United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929, 933 (2d Cir.) (Friendly, J.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Mejia-Valez
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929, 933 (2d Cir.) ("The rule limiting the use of prior statements by a witness subject to cross-examination to their effect on his credibility has been described by eminent scholars and judges as 'pious fraud,' 'artificial,' ‘basically misguided,’ [and] 'mere verbal ritual.' "), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); Quartararo v. Mantello, 715 F.Supp. 449, 461 (E.D.N.Y.1989) (although state-court trial judge instructed jury to consider defendant's statement only for impeachment purposes and not for "affirmative evidence…
examined
Cited "see"
Shippen v. Parrott
(3×)
See United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929 (2d Cir.1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); R.S.S. at 750 (In a trial to the court in which admissible evidence supports the findings, additional evidence, though inadmissible, is nonprejudicial). *87 Furthermore, the bulk of the alleged improper testimony concerned matters beyond the two-year statutory period, not the causes of action occurring during 1987.
discussed
Cited "see"
Nance v. State
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929, 934 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
Apperson v. Fleet Carrier Corporation
(2×)
See Lanigan v. Local Union No. 9, 327 F.2d 627, 628 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
Apperson v. Fleet Carrier Corp.
(2×)
See Lanigan v. Local Union No. 9, 327 F.2d 627, 628 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
Duttle v. Bandler & Kass
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929, 934 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); Nash v. Heckler, 108 F.R.D. 376, 377 (W.D.N.Y.1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
David Vogel v. Donald Percy
(2×)
The due process considerations attendant to the admission of a witness’ prior inconsistent statement as evidence in a criminal case were addressed by the Supreme Court in California v. Green, supra. The Court cautioned that Bridges could not be read as “declaring that the Constitution is necessar-' ily violated by the admission of a witness’ prior inconsistent statement for the truth of the matter asserted.” Green, 399 U.S. at 163 n. 15, 90 S.Ct. at 1937 n. 15; accord United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 933 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (196…
examined
Cited "see"
Johnson v. United States
(4×)
See United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 933 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); Jett v. Commonwealth, 436 S.W.2d 788, 792 (Ky.1969); State v. Igoe, 206 N.W.2d 291, 297 (N.D.1973); Gel haar v. State, 41 Wis.2d 230 , 163 N.W.2d 609, 614 (1969), cert. denied, 399 U.S. 929 , 90 S.Ct. 2250 , 26 L.Ed.2d 797 (1970); Fed.R.Evid. 801(d). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Charles Martin and Paul N. Hankish v. United States
(2×)
See United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929 (1964), cert. den. 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964), and its progeny.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Thomas M. Fahey
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929, 932 (2 Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Fischer
See, United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 (2nd Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 377 U. S. 979 (1964), and its progeny.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Walter Louis Allsup, A/K/A Walter Lewis Allsup
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 , cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 ; United States v. Cunningham, 446 F.2d 194 .
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Fred A. Cunningham and Rudolph J. Trumpler
(4×)
See United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 933 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Rudolph Izzi
(2×)
See United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 935 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); Boehm v. United States, 271 F. 454 (2d Cir. 1921) (gaps of four and nine months between theft and possession).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Charles T. Bennett, Wilbert Haywood, Elmer Jessup, Henry Stanton and Farris Thomas
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 (2 Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964). 6 III.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Schwartz
(2×)
See United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 (2nd Cir. 1964), cert. den. 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964), and authorities cited in that case at pp. 933-934. 8 In United States v. Allied Stevedoring Corp., 241 F.2d 925, 933 (2nd Cir.1957), the court said: “It is one thing to put in a statement of a person not before the jury: that is indeed hearsay bare and unredeemed.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Nicholas Crowder
(2×)
See 3 Wigmore, Evidence, § 1018 (3d Ed.1940) and the Second Circuit’s relevant discussion in United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 932-34 (1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 85 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
Arthur Eugene Byrd v. United States
(2×)
See United States v. DeSisto, 2 Cir., 329 F.2d 929 , cert. denied 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Borelli
See United States v. McKeever, 271 F.2d 669, 676 (2 Cir. 1959) 11 This principle long antedates and is quite different from our decision in United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, De Sisto v. United States, 84 S.Ct. 1885 (1964), that two kinds of prior statements by a witness under examination — testimony on a former trial and before a grand jury (together with identifications affirmed by such testimony) — may be considered as independent evidence even though the witness repudiates them at the trial. 12 In contrast, the judge's refusal to inspect Rinaldo's grand jur…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Beckham v. United States
(2×)
See also United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 933-34 (2d Cir.) (Friendly, J.) (noting that prior testimony under oath is given "with the oath administered not in any perfunctory fashion but in a setting calculated to impress the witness with the gravity of the responsibilities assumed"), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); see also FED.R.EVID. 801(d)(1)(A). [14] In criminal jury trials, a standard instruction given the jury at the start of trial explains: "It is important that you keep an open mind and not decide any issue in the case until the entire case ha…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Joseph L. Gallo
(2×)
See, e. g., United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 935 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); United States v. Izzi, supra, 427 F.2d at 297. 475 F.2d at 280 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States Ex Rel. Winfield v. Cascles
(2×)
See also United States v. De Sis-to, 329 F.2d 929 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Harry Oliver Linard, an Underwriter at Lloyd's, and Vainqueur Corporation, and Cross-Claimant
(2×)
See also United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964). ' We come then to the principal question on this appeal — does the underwriter have the burden of proving that there was a scuttling by the preponderance of the evidence, or does the shipowner have the burden of persuading the trier by a preponderance of the evidence that the loss was within the policy, which burden is not met when the underwriter adduces evidence, which is “in equipoise” with the shipowner’s evidence, that there was a scuttling by explosion ?
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Richard Albert Jenkins
(2×)
See, e. g., United States v. Desisto, 329 F.2d 929, 932-934 (2d Cir. *69 1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S. Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); United States v. Cunningham, 446 F.2d 194, 197-198 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 950 , 92 S.Ct. 302 , 30 L.Ed.2d 266 (1971).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Herbert R. Jacobs
(2×)
See, e. g., United States v. Desisto, 329 F.2d 929, 935 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); United States v. Izzi, supra, 427 F.2d at 297 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Zochowski
(2×)
See, e. g., United States v. Lefkowitz, 284 F.2d 310, 313 (2d Cir. 1960). . 427 F.2d 293 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 399 U.S. 928 , 90 S.Ct. 2244 , 26 L.Ed.2d 794 (1970). . 424 F.2d 991, 993-94 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 399 U.S. 92S, 90 S.Ct. 2246 , 26 L.Ed.2d 795 (1970). . 395 U.S. 6 , 89 S.Ct. 1532 , 23 L.Ed.2d 57 (1969). . 396 U.S. 398 , 90 S.Ct. 642 , 24 L.Ed.2d 610 (1970). . 329 F.2d 929 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964). .
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Louis Cramer and Minnie K. Cramer
(4×)
See, e. g., United States v. Desisto, 329 F.2d 929, 934 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964) (conviction sustained in part on basis of witness’s prior sworn testimony before grand jury).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Ray
(4×)
See also United States v. De Sisto, 329 F.2d 929 (CA 2d Cir.) (Friendly, J.), cert. denied 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964); United States v. Block, 88 F.2d 618, 620 (CA 2d Cir.) (L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Chas. Pfizer & Co.
(2×)
See United States v. Kahaner, 317 F.2d 459, 467-468 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, Keogh v. United States, 375 U.S. 836 , 84 S.Ct. 73 , 11 L.Ed.2d 65 (1963); United States v. Lefkowitz, 284 F.2d 310, 315 (2d Cir. 1960); see also United States v. DeSisto, 329 F.2d 929, 932 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 979 , 84 S.Ct. 1885 , 12 L.Ed.2d 747 (1964).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Chicago Automobile Trade Assn.
v.
Madden, Regional Director, Thirteenth Region, National Labor Relations Board
v.
Madden, Regional Director, Thirteenth Region, National Labor Relations Board
No. 1060.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 15, 1964.
Frederick W. Turner, Jr. and Karl W. Orabemann for petitioners., Solicitor General Cox, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Norton J. Come and Glen M. Bendixsen for respondents.
Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.