How cited: United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. R. S. Perkins · Go Syfert

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. R. S. Perkins (1968)

green · 34 citation events across 17 courts. Showing the 8 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
196819972026
Quote Authority · D. Kan.
Co., v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771 , 773 (10th Cir. 1968) (“Whether third-party defendants may be brought in and retained in the action is ordinarily a matter addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge.”). 2 A third-party claim may be asserted under Rule 14 “only when the third party’s liability is in some way dependent on the outcome of the main claim or when the third party is secondarily liable to the defendant.”4 The original defendant’s claim against a third-party …
“Whether third-party defendants may be brought in and retained in the action is ordinarily a matter addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge.”
Quote Authority · D. Kan.
Co. v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771 , 773 (10th Cir. 1968) (“Rule 14(a) should be liberally construed to accomplish its purpose but it is not a catchall . . . .”). “[I]mpleader is proper only where the third-party defendant’s liability is ‘in some way derivative of the outcome of the main claim.’” Hefley v. Textron, Inc., 713 F.2d 1487, 1498 (10th Cir. 1983) (quoting United States v. Joe Grasso & Son, Inc., 380 F.2d 749, 751 (5th Cir. 1967)).
“Rule 14(a) should be liberally construed to accomplish its purpose but it is not a catchall . . . .”
Quote Authority · D. Kan.
Co. v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771 , 773 (10th Cir. 1968) (“Rule 14(a) should be liberally construed to accomplish its purpose but it is not a catchall . . . .”). “[I]mpleader is proper only where the third-party defendant’s liability is ‘in some way derivative of the outcome of the main claim.’” Hefley v. Textron, Inc., 713 F.2d 1487, 1498 (10th Cir. 1983) (quoting United States v. Joe Grasso & Son, Inc., 380 F.2d 749, 751 (5th Cir. 1967)).
“Rule 14(a) should be liberally construed to accomplish its purpose but it is not a catchall . . . .”
Rule Authority · D. Colo.
Perkins, 388 F.2d at 773.
Quote Authority · N.D. Okla.
Co. v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771 (10th Cir. 1968) (“If impleading a third party defendant would require the trial of issues not involved in the controversy between the original 4 parties without serving any convenience, there is no good reason to permit the third-party complaint to be filed”).
“If impleading a third party defendant would require the trial of issues not involved in the controversy between the original 4 parties without serving any convenience, there is no good reason to permit the third-party complaint to be filed”
Rule Authority · Bankr. D. Minn.
See, e.g., Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 567 F.2d 429, 477 (D.C.Cir.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1086 , 98 S.Ct. 1281 , 55 L.Ed.2d 792 (1978); United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771, 773 (10th Cir.1968); Eastman Chemical International, Ltd. v. Virginia National Bank, 94 F.R.D. 21, 22 (E.D.Tenn.1981); Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. I.
Rule Authority · Bankr. M.D. Tenn.
See, e.g., Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 567 F.2d 429, 477 (D.C.Cir.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1086 , 98 S.Ct. 1281 , 55 L.Ed.2d 792 (1978); United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771, 773 (10th Cir.1968); Eastman Chemical International, Ltd. v. Virginia National Bank, 94 F.R.D. 21, 22 (E.D.Tenn.1981); Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. I.
Rule Authority · Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Perkins, 388 F.2d 771, 733 (10th Cir. 1968).