Mary Taylor, Administratrix of the Estate of John H. Taylor, Deceased v. Rederi A/s Volo v. Lavino Shipping Company, Third-Party’s Empirical Analysis
374 F.2d 545 · 1967
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently July 2015 · most notably Murphy v. Country House, Inc. (1976), United States v. Webber (1968)
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
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 Dyer v. MacDougall · Robin Construction Co. v. United States · International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union v. Paul R. Kuntz and John G. Cvitkovic, Individually and as Members of a Class, Pacific Maritime Association v. Paul R. Kuntz and John G. Cvitkovic, Individually and as Members of a Class · Stanley v. Guy Scroggins Construction Co. · Frey v. Frankel
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * the moving party has the burden of clearly establishing the lack of any triable issue, although the opposing party would at trial have the burden of proof on a particular issue. It is not the function of the trial court at the summary judgment hearing to resolve any genuine factual issue, including credibility; and for purposes of ruling on the motion all factual inferences are to be taken against the moving party and in favor of the opposing party, and the appellate court will do likewise in reviewing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment. Discretion plays no real role in the grant of summary judgment: the grant of summary judgment must be proper under the above principles or the grant is subject to reversal. The trial court may, however, exercise a sound discretion in denying summary judgment where, although the movant may have technically shouldered his burden, the court is not reasonably certain that there is no triable issue of fact; where a portion of an action may be ripe for summary judgment but it is intertwined with another claim(s) that must be tried; and in certain other situations.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“mere hope that evidence to support his claim would develop at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.