Treatment trajectory · 1965 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1965
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Estate of Overton
Id. at 182-83, 126 N.W.2d at 154-55 (footnote omitted).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Stuempges v. Parke, Davis & Co.
Id. at 182-83, 126 N.W.2d at 154-55 (footnotes omitted).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Idlibi v. Hartford Courant Co. (Dissent)
See, e.g., Cepeda v. Cowles Magazines & Broadcasting, Inc., 328 F.2d 869 , 870–71 (9th Cir.) (concluding that jury reasonably could find that magazine article and photograph showing plaintiff baseball player ‘‘being banned by the umpire from a game because he had made a violent gesture . . . at being called out at first base’’ was defamatory when it was disputed whether plaintiff was ‘‘temperamental, uncooperative and under- productive’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 844 , 85 S. Ct. 51 , 13 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Idlibi v. Hartford Courant Co. (Dissent)
See, e.g., Cepeda v. Cowles Magazines & Broadcasting, Inc., 328 F.2d 869 , 870–71 (9th Cir.) (concluding that jury reasonably could find that magazine article and photograph showing plaintiff baseball player ‘‘being banned by the umpire from a game because he had made a violent gesture . . . at being called out at first base’’ was defamatory when it was disputed whether plaintiff was ‘‘temperamental, uncooperative and under- productive’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 844 , 85 S. Ct. 51 , 13 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Salt Lake City v. Grotepas
Brinson v. Florida, 273 F.Supp. 840, 846-47 (S.D.Fla.1967); see also United States v. Dardi, 330 F.2d 316, 335 (2d Cir.) (holding that exercise of right to counsel must be subject to necessities of sound judicial administration), cer t. denied, 379 U.S. 845 , 85 S.Ct. 50 , 51, 13 L.Ed.2d 50 (1964); accord Creighton v. North Carolina, 257 F.Supp. 806, 809 (E.D.N.C.1966) (same).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Interstate Printing Co. v. Department of Revenue
(2×)
See, also, Mulder v. Mendo Wood Products, Inc., 225 Cal. App. 2d 619 , 37 Cal. Rptr. 479 (1964), cert. denied 379 U.S. 844 , 85 S. Ct. 85 , 13 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Penfield v. Venuti
See also United States v. Dardi, 330 F.2d 316, 336 (2d Cir.) (“[w]hile an arrest alone is not normally admissible to impair the credibility of a witness, the fact that it may embitter him so as to motivate him to testify as he has may be relevant”), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 845 , 85 S.Ct. 50 , 13 L.Ed.2d 50 (1964).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mendo Wood Products, Inc.
v.
Mulder
v.
Mulder
No. 394.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 12, 1964.
John T. Casey and James F. Kemp for petitioner. David L. Luce for respondents.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: C.D. California (1) · E.D. New York (1)
District Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District. Certiorari denied.