James Campy Irby v. United States, 362 F.2d 723 (4th Cir. 1966). · Go Syfert
Search
James Campy Irby v. United States, 362 F.2d 723 (4th Cir. 1966). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1973 · 2 courts · …certain 'overriding royalties' and other interests in properties, ⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1985 · 2 courts · …the right to remove depends upon the case disclosed by the pleadings when the petition for removal is filed and that the subsequent addition of new parties is not to be considered on a motion to remand. at p. 726 ⚠ not in text
61 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 22 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Powell v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (wvsd, 2020-04-10)
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1968 1997 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Powell v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
S.D.W. Va · 2020 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
indispensable parties must be joined, sua sponte by the court if need be.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Global Paycard Corporation v. Onecom, LLC
N.D. Tex. · 2022 · confidence medium
BRANTL : STARR UNITED‘STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir. 1966).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Jaffer v. Standard Chartered Bank
N.D. Tex. · 2014 · confidence medium
Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jimenez v. Rodriguez-Pagan
D.P.R. · 2008 · confidence medium
Nevertheless, “when a party is deemed indispensable, the court may order the joinder, even though said action may imply the loss of diversity of citizenship of parties, likewise depriving the Court of jurisdiction over the subject matter.” Baker v. Estate of Felix Rosenbaum, 58 F.R.D. 496, 498 (D.P.R.1972)(citing Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.1966)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Marietta v. CSX Transportation
11th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
(If Georgia were joined, diversity would 5 See Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir. 1966); see also Liddy v. Urbanek, 707 F.2d 1222 , 1223 n.2 (11th Cir. 1983) (absence of an indispensable party, whose presence would defeat diversity jurisdiction, may be raised for the first time on appeal). 8 disappear because the state is not a citizen.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) DM II, Ltd. v. Hospital Corp. of America
N.D. Ga. · 1989 · confidence medium
Id; Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.1966); see also Martin, — U.S. at—, 109 S.Ct. at 2183 (Rule 19’s provisions for joining interested parties are designed to accomodate the sort of complexities that may arise from a decree affecting numerous people in various ways). (3) Adequacy of Judgment.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Munford v. MacLellan
N.D. Ga. · 1988 · confidence medium
Co., 587 F.2d 642, 645-46 (5th Cir.1978); Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 600 , 17 L.Ed.2d 448 (1966).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Shelton v. Exxon Corp.
S.D. Tex. · 1987 · confidence medium
Civ.P., had not been joined, the district court should have remanded the case to state court.” Merrimack, 587 F.2d at 646 (citing Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 385 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 600 , 17 L.Ed.2d 448 (1966).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Patterson v. Winthrop-Breon Laboratories
E.D. Wash. · 1986 · confidence medium
The jurisdictional necessity of joinder in these circumstances is more concretely discussed in Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Timothy A. McKay by and Through His Guardian and Next Friend, Thomas G. McKay v. Boyd Construction Co., Inc. And Mississippi State Highway Department
5th Cir. · 1985 · confidence medium
Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 730 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied sub nom.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Linder v. Liberty Mutual Insurance (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
M.D. La. · 1985 · confidence medium
In the Merrimack case, the Fifth Circuit again rejected the argument it initially rejected in Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 600 , 17 L.Ed.2d 448 (1966), that “the right to remove depends upon the case disclosed by the pleadings when the petition for removal is filed and that the subsequent addition of new parties is not to be considered on a motion to remand.” See 587 F.2d at 646 .
cited Cited as authority (rule) Gravitt v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
W.D. Tex. · 1975 · confidence medium
See also: Jett v. Zink, 362 F. 2d 723, 730 (5th Cir.), cert, denied, 385 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 600 , 17 L.Ed.2d 448 (1966); Laburnan Constr.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sterling Oil of Oklahoma, Inc. v. Pack (2×)
Ala. · 1973 · confidence medium
The Fifth Circuit Court’s opinion, reported in 362 F.2d 723 at 730, concluded (first Jett v. Zink appeal, 1966): “The result is unfortunate in that it leaves the same issues pending simultaneously in a state and federal court but we see no escape from our conclusion.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Horton R. Prudden (2×)
5th Cir. · 1970 · confidence medium
Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 729 (5th Cir. 1966), cert. den., Chamberlain v. Zink, 385 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 597 , 17 L.Ed.2d 448 (1967). .
cited Cited "see" Chambers Medical Foundation v. Chambers
W.D. La. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See, Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 729 (5th Cir.1966).
discussed Cited "see" City of Marietta v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
11th Cir. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (5th Cir.1966); see also Liddy v. Urbanek, 707 F.2d 1222 , 1223 n. 2 (11th Cir.1983) (absence of an indispensable party, whose presence would defeat diversity jurisdiction, may be raised for the first time on appeal). 6 .
discussed Cited "see" In Re Merrimack Mutual Fire Insurance Company
5th Cir. · 1978 · signal: see · confidence high
See Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 726 (CA5), Cert. denied, 385 U.S. 987 , 87 S.Ct. 600 , 17 L.Ed.2d 448 (1966); Hilton v. Atlantic Refining Co., 327 F.2d 217, 219 (CA5, 1966); Accord, 1A Moore's Federal Practice P 0.161(1), at 209 (2d ed. 1974).
cited Cited "see" Board of County Commissioners v. Blount Bros.
S.D. Fla. · 1972 · signal: see · confidence high
See Jett v. Zink, 362 F.2d 723, 730 (5th Cir. 1966); Edwards v. E.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
James Campy IRBY, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
10442.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jun 6, 1966.
362 F.2d 723
Thomas R. Dyson, Jr., Washington, D. C. (Court-assigned counsel), for appellant., John D. Schmidtlein, Asst. U. S. Atty. (C. V. Spratley, Jr., U. S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.
Sobelofp, Boreman, Bryan.
Published
PER CURIAM:

This is a proceeding under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, brought by the appellant who is under sentence for violation of the narcotics law. He claimed that at his trial he was under the influence of heroin and unable to cooperate intelligently with his counsel. After a full hearing the District Judge found that the claim was unsupported and denied relief. We affirm.

Affirmed.