Citation network
Semtek Int'l Inc. Vs. Lockheed MartIn Corp.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 27, 2001
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
-
Semtek Int'l Inc. v. LockheedSearch
-
Martin Corp. - 531 U.S. 497 (2001) October Term, 2000 Syllabus Semtek International Inc. V. LockheedSearch
-
necessarily precluded the Maryland statecourt action. Pp. 500-509. (a) Dupasseur v. RochereauSearch
-
itself. Moreover, as so interpreted, the Rule would in many cases violate the federalism principle of Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
Hanna v. PlumerSearch
-
U. S. 1260 (2000). II Petitioner contends that the outcome of this case is controlled by Dupasseur v. RochereauSearch
-
triggers the doctrine of res judicata or claim preclusion. See, e. g., Park lane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Goddard v. SecuritySearch
-
do not (in many jurisdictions) entail claim-preclusive effect. Compare, e. g., Western Coal & Mining Co. v. JonesSearch
-
Cal. 2d 819, 826, 167 P. 2d 719, 724 (1946), and Koch v. RodlinSearch
-
Enterprises, Inc., 223 Cal. App. 3d 1591, 1596, 273 Cal. Rptr. 438, 441 (1990), with Plaut v. SpendthriftSearch
-
Goddard, supra, at 50-51, 92 P. 2d, at 806-807, and Allston v. IncorporatedSearch
-
Centre, 25 App. Div. 2d 545, 546, 267 N. Y. S. 2d 564, 565-566 (1966), with Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSearch
-
b). Cf. Ortiz v. FibreboardSearch
-
Moreover, as so interpreted, the Rule would in many cases violate the federalism principle of Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
U. S. 460 , 467-468 (1965). See also Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSearch
-
U. S. 99 , 108-110 (1945). Cf. Walker v. ArmcoSearch
-
in the preceding paragraphs-arguable violation of the Rules Enabling Act and incompatibility with Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
aware of no case that applies it. 505 mulgation of Rule 41(b), we have not once done so. See, e. g., Heck v. HumphreySearch
-
Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. UniversitySearch
-
claim-preclusive effect, in Maryland, of this California federal diversity judgment is dictated neither by Dupasseur v. RochereauSearch
-
effect they would give their own judgments, but must accord them the effect that this Court prescribes. See Stoll v. GottliebSearch
-
Gunter v. AtlanticSearch
-
Such cases are distinctly pointed out in the opinion of Mr. Jus- 508 tice Bradley in Dupasseur v. RochereauSearch
-
the law that would be applied by state courts in the State in which the federal diversity court sits. See Gasperini v. CenterSearch
-
Walker v. ArmcoSearch
-
Bernhardt v. PolygraphicSearch
-
Klaxon Co. v. StentorSearch
-
by the divergent effects that the litigants would anticipate from likely grounds of dismissal. See Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSearch
-
Syllabus Semtek International Inc. V. LockheedSearch
-
of Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSearch
-
Western Coal & Mining Co. v. JonesSearch
-
and Koch v. RodlinSearch
-
Plaut v. SpendthriftSearch
-
and Allston v. IncorporatedSearch
-
Cf. Ortiz v. FibreboardSearch
-
Cf. Walker v. ArmcoSearch
-
Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
See Stoll v. GottliebSearch
-
See Gasperini v. CenterSearch
-
See Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial