green
Positive treatment
2.3 score
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 "see"
Laing v. Fidelity Broadcasting Corp.
See Collins v. Government of Virgin Islands, 366 F.2d 279 (3d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 958 , 87 S.Ct. 1026 , 18 L.Ed.2d 105 (1967) where the co-defendant, Benjamin, filed a demand, while the co-defendant Government did not.
discussed
Cited "see"
Fields Engineering & Equipment, Inc. v. Cargill, Inc.
Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2332; see Collins v. Government of the Virgin Islands, 366 F.2d 279 , 286 (3d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 958 , 87 S.Ct. 1026 , 18 L.Ed.2d 105 (1967).
cited
Cited "see"
Drakatos v. R. B. Denison, Inc.
See Collins v. Government of Virgin Islands, 366 F.2d 279 , 284 (3d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 958 , 87 S.Ct. 1026 , 18 L.Ed.2d 105 (1967); 5 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 38.45 (2d ed. 1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.
See Collins v. Government of the Virgin Islands, 366 F.2d 279 (3d Cir.) cert. denied, 386 U.S. 958 , 87 S.Ct. 1026 , 18 L.Ed.2d 105 (1966).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cannon v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Company
Accordingly, we hold that the application of the doctrine of collateral estoppel was not appropriate in view of the particular circumstances presented by this case and that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the issue of liability.” (Id. at 9,12.) (Footnote omitted.) Plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors have demanded a trial by jury on all issues in accordance with Rule 38, F.R.Civ.P., and defendants are entitled to rely on this demand since “ [a] demand for a trial by jury made as herein provided may not be withdrawn without the consent of the parties.” Rule 38(d),…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Arif v. AT&T CORP.
See also, Woody v. Sterling Aluminum Prod., Inc., 244 F.Supp. 84, 90 (E.D.Mo. 1965), aff'd, 365 F.2d 448 (8th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 957 , 87 S.Ct. 1026 , 18 L.Ed.2d 105 (1967), reh’g denied, 386 U.S. 1027 , 87 S.Ct. 1371 , 18 L.Ed.2d 471 (1967).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Woody
v.
Sterling Aluminum Products, Inc.
v.
Sterling Aluminum Products, Inc.
No. 946.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 13, 1967.
Jerome J. Duff for petitioners^ Daniel Bartlett and William Stix for Sterling Aluminum Products, Inc., and Donald S. Siegel for' International Association of Machinists et al., respondents.
Published
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.