Citation network
United States Vs. Seckinger
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 09, 1970
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. 203 (1970) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. SeckingerSearch
-
U.S. 203 (1970) United States v. SeckingerSearch
-
negligence arguably combined with that of the contractor to produce a given injury. In American Stevedores, Inc. v. PorelloSearch
-
we agree with the Court of Appeals that federal law controls the interpretation of the contract. See United States v. CountySearch
-
Clearfield Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Gelco Builders & Burjay Const. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
between the parties, such as exists between the United States and particular government contractors. See United States v. HaskinSearch
-
Fisher v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 299 F.Supp. 1 (D.C.E.D.Pa.1969), and United States v. AccroccoSearch
-
unless this intention appeared with particular clarity from the contract. See, e.g., Associated Engineers, Inc. v. JobSearch
-
F.2d 633, 651 (C.A. 8th Cir.1966), cert. denied sub nom. Troy Cannon Const. Co. v. JobSearch
-
a stevedoring contractor although both the United States and the contractor were found to have been negligent. Porello v. UnitedSearch
-
Sternberger v. UnitedSearch
-
Sun Shipbuilding & Drydock Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Jones v. UnitedSearch
-
for the indemnitee's negligence only if this intention is explicitly stated in the contract. See, e.g., Freed v. GreatSearch
-
Brogdon v. SouthernSearch
-
City of Beaumont v. GrahamSearch
-
Young v. AnacondaSearch
-
stated in the contract if this intention otherwise appears with clarity. See, e.g., Auto Owners Mut. Ins. Co. v. NorthernSearch
-
Eastern Gas & Fuel Associates v. Midwest-RaleighSearch
-
Unitec Corp. v. BeattySearch
-
Batson-Cook Co. v. IndustrialSearch
-
that purported to indemnify for the indemnitee's negligence void as contrary to public policy. See, e.g., Sternaman v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Johnson's Administratrix v. RichmondSearch
-
D. R. Co., 86 Va. 975, 11 S.E. 829 (1890). See also Bisso v. InlandSearch
-
Otis Elevator Co. v. MarylandSearch
-
clause. Our approach is, in this respect, consistent with American Stevedores, Inc. v. PorelloSearch
-
United States v. HaskinSearch
-
Shamrock Towing Co. v. CitySearch
-
Williams v. MidlandSearch
-
is not infrequently permitted on implied or quasi -contractual theories. See, e.g., Associated Engineers, Inc. v. JobSearch
-
a suit is permitted under South Carolina law apparently has not been authoritatively determined. See generally Burns v. CarolinaSearch
-
A number of courts have reached comparable results. See, e.g., Brogdon v. SouthernSearch
-
C & L Rural Elec. Coop. Corp. v. KincaidSearch
-
American Brass Co., 43 Wis.2d 36, 168 N.W.2d 112 (1969). See also United States v. HaskinSearch
-
the general rule is that there is no right to contribution among joint tortfeasors. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. WhetstoneSearch
-
Adams v. Davison-PaxonSearch
-
E.g., Chrysler Corp. v. HanoverSearch
-
Riess v. MurchisonSearch
-
Sternberger v. UnitedSearch
-
Rock Island, A. & L. R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. SeckingerSearch
-
In American Stevedores, Inc. v. PorelloSearch
-
See United States v. CountySearch
-
See United States v. HaskinSearch
-
Fisher v. UnitedSearch
-
(D.C.E.D.Pa.1969), and United States v. AccroccoSearch
-
Associated Engineers, Inc. v. JobSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial