40 Cases, More or Less, of Six One-Gallon Cans v. United States
40 Cases, More or Less, of Six One-Gallon Cans v. United States, 368 U.S. 831 (1961)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 3 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(stating that “a confusing and improperly worded interrogatory cannot fairly be considered a ‘material’ question, or one the answer which ‘is necessary to a verdict’ ” under Rule 49(b))
-
(FECA bars FTCA claim for impotence and loss of consortium allegedly caused by government negligence)
-
(“Acts performed and letters written during attempted settlement negotiations are usually inadmissible [because] [t]he law favors settlements.”)
Cited by 51 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Becton, Dickinson and Company -Cross v. Sherwood Medical Industries Inc. -Cross
- Alphonso Marcus v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U. S. Department of Labor
- Doe v. Buccini Pollin Group, Inc.
- Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Antibiotic Antitrust Actions. Pfizer, Inc. v. International Rectifier Corp.
- Monsanto Company v. Rohm & Haas Company
- Karl Ziegler v. Phillips Petroleum Company
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.