How cited: American International Reinsurance Co. v. AIRCO, Inc. · Go Syfert

American International Reinsurance Co. v. AIRCO, Inc. (1978)

green · 102 citation events across 37 courts. Showing the 14 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197820022026
Quote Authority · 9th Cir.
Utility Consumers Council v. Public Service Commission, 562 S.W.2d 688, 698-99 (Mo.App.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 192 , 58 L.Ed.2d 177 (1978) ("The federal government regulates how nuclear power plants will be constructed and maintained; the State of Missouri regulates whether they will be constructed.") 69 In concluding that Congress intended to preempt only regulation of radiological hazards, we join the only other circuit court to have considered the issue t…
"The federal government regulates how nuclear power plants will be constructed and maintained; the State of Missouri regulates whether they will be constructed."
Quote Authority · 9th Cir.
Utility Consumers Council v. Public Service Commission, 562 S.W.2d 688, 698-99 (Mo. App.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 192 , 58 L.Ed.2d 177 (1978) (“The federal government regulates how nuclear power plants will be constructed and maintained; the State of Missouri regulates whether they will be constructed.”) In concluding that Congress intended to preempt only regulation of radiological hazards, we join the only other circuit court to have considered the issue thu…
“The federal government regulates how nuclear power plants will be constructed and maintained; the State of Missouri regulates whether they will be constructed.”
Quote Authority · N.D. Ill. · signal: see also
See also Sitkin Smelting and Refining Co. v. FMC Corp., 575 F.2d 440, 446 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978) (“The price-fixing within the scope of the per se prohibition of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, however, is an agreement to fix the price to be charged in transactions with third parties, not between the contracting parties themselves”).
“The price-fixing within the scope of the per se prohibition of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, however, is an agreement to fix the price to be charged in transactions with third parties, not between the contracting parties themselves”
Cited · S.D. Miss. · signal: see
See Rabon v. Guardsmark, Inc., 571 F.2d 1277 (4th Cir.1978), cert denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978) (security company whose security guard committed a rape while on duty could not be held vicariously liable under a theory of respondeat superior for its security guard’s actions because the conduct did not further Guardmark’s business, and, in fact, it was the converse of Guardmark’s purpose).
Cited · E.D. Pa. · signal: see
See Rabon v. Guardsmark, Inc., 571 F.2d 1277 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978); see also Bouton, 29 F.3d at 107 (sexual harassment is outside the scope of employment); Blankenship v. Parke Care Centers, Inc., 123 F.3d 868, 872-73 (6th Cir.1997), cert. de nied, 522 U.S. 1110 , 118 S.Ct. 1039 , 140 L.Ed.2d 105 (1998); Fleming v. Boeing Co., 120 F.3d 242 , 246 (11th Cir.1997); Perry v. Ethan Allen, Inc., 115 F.3d 143, 149 (2d Cir.1997…
green State v. Lindsey (1996)
Cited · La. Ct. App. · signal: see
See and compare State v. Falkins, 356 So.2d 415 (La.1978), cert. denied 439 U.S. 865 , 99 S.Ct. 190 , 58 L.Ed.2d 175 (1978).
Cited · E.D. Va. · signal: see
See Sitkin Smelting & Refining Co. v. FMC Corp., 575 F.2d 440, 446 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978); Garshman v. Universal Resources Holding, Inc., 625 F.Supp. 737, 743 (D.N.J.1986); Humboldt Bay Mun.
green Mitchell v. Miner (1990)
Cited · Mo. Ct. App. · signal: see
See Utility Consumers Council v. Public Service Commission, 562 S.W.2d 688, 695 (Mo.App.1978) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 192 , 58 L.Ed.2d 177 .
Cited · Mass. · signal: see
See Rabon v. Guardsmark Inc., 571 F.2d 1277 (4th Cir.), cert, denied, 439 U.S. 866 (1978). 16 Of course, a tort defendant’s participation in or active facilitation of abuse by others would constitute “intended” injury and would not be cov *411 ered.
Cited · W.D. Pa. · signal: see
See Sitkin Smelting & Refining Co., Inc. v. FMC Corp., 575 F.2d 440, 448 (3d Cir.) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978); United States v. Empire Gas Corp., 537 F.2d 296, 308 (8th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1122 , 97 S.Ct. 1158 , 51 L.Ed.2d 572 (1977).
Cited · D. Mass. · signal: see
See Sitkin Smelting & Refining Co., Inc. v. FMC Corp., 575 F.2d 440, 446 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978) (the per se rule applies to “an agreement to fix the price to be charged in transactions with third parties, not between the contrasting parties themselves”).
the per se rule applies to “an agreement to fix the price to be charged in transactions with third parties, not between the contrasting parties themselves”
Cited · W.D. Pa. · signal: see
See Sitkin Smelting & Refining Co. v. FMC Corp., 575 F.2d 440 (3d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978).
Cited (see also) · S.D.N.Y. · signal: see also
See also Sitkin Smelting & Refining Co. v. FMC Co., 575 F.2d 440 , 446 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978) (per se rule not applicable to situation of sham bidding); Joseph E.
green Robinson v. Magovern (1981)
Cited · W.D. Pa. · signal: see
See Sitkin Smelting & Refining Co., Inc. v. FMC Corp., 575 F.2d 440 , 448 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 866 , 99 S.Ct. 191 , 58 L.Ed.2d 176 (1978); United States v. Empire Gas Corp., 537 F.2d 296, 308 (8th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1122 , 97 S.Ct. 1158 , 51 L.Ed.2d 572 (1977).