Mertes v. Mertes, 411 U.S. 961 (1973). · Go Syfert
Search
Mertes v. Mertes, 411 U.S. 961 (1973). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
29 citation events across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Moreno L. Keplinger, Paul L. Wright, and James B. Plank (ca7, 1985-10-29)
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973 1999 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" United States v. Moreno L. Keplinger, Paul L. Wright, and James B. Plank
7th Cir. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Grizaffi, 471 F.2d 69, 74 (7th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 964 , 93 S.Ct. 2141 , 36 L.Ed.2d 684 (1973).
cited Cited "see" Harrington v. Inhabitants of Town of Garland, Me.
D. Me. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mertes v. Mertes, 350 F.Supp. 472, 474 (D.Del.1972), aff’d mem., 411 U.S. 961 , 93 S.Ct. 2141 , 36 L.Ed.2d 681 (1973).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Cecil Ray Johnson (2×)
7th Cir. · 1975 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Grizaffi, 471 F.2d 69, 75 (7th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 964 , 93 S.Ct. 2141 , 36 L.Ed.2d 684 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Levy v. United States
S.D.N.Y. · 1991 · signal: see also · confidence low
It is far better to preclude the third person, who has already had one opportunity to litigate.... 18 Wright & Miller, at 563-64; see also Mertes v. Mertes, 350 F.Supp. 472, 475 (D.Del.1972) (claim preclusion appropriate where any judgment necessarily would undo prior judgment), aff'd, 411 U.S. 961 , 93 S.Ct. 2141 , 36 L.Ed.2d 681 (1973).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Lecates v. JUSTICE OF PEACE CT. NO. 4, ETC.
D. Del. · 1976 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., Mertes v. Mertes, 350 F.Supp. 472 , aff’d 411 U.S. 961 , 93 S.Ct. 2141 , 36 L.Ed.2d 681 (1973).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mertes
v.
Mertes
No. 72-1003.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 7, 1973.
411 U.S. 961
Jurisdiction, Set, Would.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published

Affirmed on appeal from D. C. Del.

Mr. Justice Douglas would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.