Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 262 F.2d 122 - American Export Lines, Inc. v. Revel

American Export Lines, Inc. v. Revel’s Empirical Analysis

262 F.2d 122 · 1958

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 2018

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

1001958196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Virginia Land Co. v. Miami Shipbuilding Corp. · Prudential Steamship Corporation, Libellant-Appellant v. United States of America, States Marine Corporation of Delaware v. United States · 113 F. Supp. 726 - Skupski v. Western Nav. Corp. · 152 F. Supp. 848 - Mangone v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “is to prevent circuity of action by drawing into one proceeding all parties who may become ultimately liable, so that they may therein assert and have a determination of their various claims inter sese. This is intended to save the time and cost of duplicating evidence and to obtain consistent results from identical or similar evidence, as well as to avoid the serious handicap of a time lag between a judgment against the original defendant and a judgment in his favor against the third-party defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “not intended to change the rule in respect to appeals by other persons from orders with which the United States had no concern simply because of the fact that the United States was a party to the proceeding below but not to the issues involved in the appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[n]othing in the governing provisions of the statute and rule requires this solecism”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.