Citation network
Van Dusen Vs. Barrack
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 30, 1964
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 612 (1964) U.S. Supreme Court Van Dusen v. BarrackSearch
-
U.S. 612 (1964) Van Dusen v. BarrackSearch
-
Thus, as the Court recognized in Continental Grain Co. v. BargeSearch
-
F.2d at 957-958. In concluding that the transfer could not be granted, the Court of Appeals relied upon Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
criterion, the defendants argue that the posture of the case under state law is irrelevant. They contend that Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
The plaintiffs contend that Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
A. In Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
In the present case, the Court of Appeals concluded that transfer could not be granted because here, as in Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
The answer, we think, is quite evident. As MR. JUSTICE BLACK said, speaking for the Court in Continental Grain Co. v. BargeSearch
-
omissions, to prevent a transfer otherwise proper and warranted by convenience and justice. In Continental Grain Co. v. BargeSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
It follows that a federal district court sitting in Pennsylvania, and referring, as is required by Klaxon Co. v. StentorSearch
-
The plaintiffs, however, point to the decision of the New York Court of Appeals in Kilberg v. NortheastSearch
-
Y.2d 34, 211 N.Y.S.2d 133, 172 N.E.2d 526, and the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Pearson v. NortheastSearch
-
a), in Headrick v. AtchisonSearch
-
and further developed in the recent decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in H. L. Green Co., Inc. v. MacMahonSearch
-
statutes of limitations, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit plainly indicated in H. L. Green Co., Inc. v. MacMahonSearch
-
acquired under state law should be unaffected. The case should remain as it was in all respects but location. Headrick v. AtchisonSearch
-
courts, our interpretation of that statute fully accords with and is supported by the policy underlying Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
Klaxon Co. v. StentorSearch
-
Erie doctrine which the quoted formulations were designed to express. As this Court said in Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSearch
-
Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
of judicial power between State and federal courts. . . . The nub of the policy that underlies Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
Cf. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSearch
-
in this case, urges that the judgment below be reversed because mandamus was an improper remedy. However, in Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
a) transfer cases which the Court of Appeals reviewed through exercise of the mandamus power. See also Norwood v. KirkpatrickSearch
-
a) transfer, we find it unnecessary to consider the mandamus contentions advanced by the Government. Cf. Platt v. MinnesotaSearch
-
Norwood v. KirkpatrickSearch
-
See Ex parte Collett, supra, and United States v. NationalSearch
-
In the two cases decided sub nom. Hoffman v. BlaskiSearch
-
Two weeks after Hoffman, the Court decided Continental Grain Co. v. BargeSearch
-
A similar rule had been applied in Felchlin v. AmericanSearch
-
a). (Emphasis added.) See Goldlawr, Inc., v. HeimanSearch
-
The implications of the Court of Appeals' decision are plainly indicated by two subsequent decisions, Goranson v. CapitalSearch
-
Airlines, Inc., 221 F.Supp. 820 (D.C.E.D.Va.), and Thompson v. CapitalSearch
-
See the rationale adopted in Felchlin v. AmericanSearch
-
In Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 352 U. S. 129 , 352 U. S. 132 -133. E.g., Beatty v. FoxSearch
-
Macchiaroli v. HowellSearch
-
Boott Mills v. BostonSearch
-
Bagley v. SmallSearch
-
Spangler v. Helm'sSearch
-
Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger R. Co. v. BoudrouSearch
-
Cf. Goranson v. KloebSearch
-
The defendants, rejecting the view adopted by the Second Circuit in Pearson v. NortheastSearch
-
See H. L. Green Co., Inc., v. MacMahonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial