green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
4.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1974 ·
…the occasion for facing such a possibility ought not to be forced until it is inescapably necessary
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1967 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1967
1996
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Industrial Communications Systems, Inc. v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company
the occasion for facing such a possibility ought not to be forced until it is inescapably necessary
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Industrial Communications Systems, Inc. v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.
the occasion for facing such a possibility ought not to be forced until it is inescapably necessary
discussed
Cited "see"
Centel Communications Co. v. Commissioner
(2×)
See Carter v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company , 365 F.2d 486 (5th Cir. 1966) , cert. denied 385 U.S. 1008 ↩ (1967) . 4.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. McKenzie
See Carter v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 365 F.2d 486, 488-89 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1008 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967) (where an order not itself appealable served as "the reason” for an appealable injunctive order, this Court reviewed the underlying order as part and parcel of the appealable order).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. John E. McKenzie Dale Bonura, Stephen Farrar, Stephen Reboul, Ronald F. Brink, Thomas R. Woodall and Richard Leblanc v. Cbs, Inc., Movant-Appellant. In Re Cbs, Inc., United States of America v. John E. McKenzie Dale Bonura, Stephen Farrar, Stephen Reboul, Ronald F. Brink, Thomas R. Woodall and Richard Leblanc v. Cbs, Inc., Movant-Appellant. In Re Cbs, Inc., in Re Cbs, Inc., Contempt of Court. United States of America v. Cbs, Inc.
See Carter v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 365 F.2d 486, 488-89 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1008 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967) (where an order not itself appealable served as "the reason" for an appealable injunctive order, this Court reviewed the underlying order as part and parcel of the appealable order).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Burdick v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
See also Carter v. American Telephone & Telegraph Company, 365 F.2d 486 (5th Cir. 1966), cert. denied 385 U.S. 1008 (1967). .We then face the issue of the reasonableness of the tariff and upon whom that determination falls.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Martin
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 770.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 9, 1967.
Edward Bennett Williams and Robert L. Weinberg for petitioner., Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (2)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.