BURNETT ET AL.

v.

GRAVES ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (32 total)

• United States v. Feola, 420 U.S. 671 (U.S. 1975)
  …us the other way — that is, in holding or assuming that proof of scienter was required for the offense of obstructing or assaulting a federal officer. E. g., Hall v. United States, 235 F. 2d 248; Carter v. United States, 231 F. 2d 232, cert. denied, 351 U. S. 984; Owens v. United States, 201 F. 2d 749; Hargett v. United States, 183 F. 2d 859; Sparks v. United States, 90 F. 2d 61; United States v. Bell, 219 F. Supp. 260; United States v. Page, 277 F. 459; United States v. Taylor, 57 F. 391; United States v. M…
• Arrowsmith v. United Press Int'l, 320 F.2d 219 (2d Cir. 1963)
  …te law governed jury submissions in diversity cases. Gutierrez v. Public Service Interstate Transp. Co., 2 Cir., 168 F. 2d 678, 680; Rowe v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, 2 Cir., 231 F. 2d 922, 924, cert. denied Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines v. Rowe, 351 U.S. 984, 76 S.Ct. 1052, 100 L.Ed. 1498; Presser Royalty Co. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 2 Cir., 272 F. 2d 838, 840; cf. O’Connor v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 2 Cir., 308 F. 2d 911.1 That experience of error should have warned us against overhasty application of the…
• Standard OIL Co. OF Cal. v. Moore, 251 F.2d 188 (9th Cir. 1957)
  …Wash.2d 138, 148, 265 P. 2d 1037, 1043; Starr v. Oriole Cafeterias, 182 Md. 214, 34 A. 2d 335. Conversely, such a question need not include every fact in the case. Rowe v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, 2 Cir., 231 F. 2d 922, 925, certiorari denied, 351 U.S. 984, 76 S.Ct. 1052, 100 L.Ed. 1498. . It should not be understood, from the’ foregoing discussion, that it is always-necessary to propound a hypothetical question in eliciting the opinion of an expert. The present trend of thinking is-that the use of h…