HARRISON

v.

SETTLE, WARDEN; PEARSON V. GRAY, WARDEN; SMITH V. ILLINOIS; BEAVER V. SMYTH, SUPERINTENDENT, VIRGINIA STATE PENITENTIARY; HARPER V. MURPHY, WARDEN; GOSSO V. GLADDEN, WARDEN; PLATER V. STEINER, WARDEN; HILL V. SETTLE, WARDEN; WINSTON V. LOONEY, WARDEN; LEMPIA V. HEINZE, WARDEN, ET AL.; TISCIO V. MARTIN, WARDEN, ET AL.; ROBINSON V. BROWNELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL; YOST V. RAGEN, WARDEN; LUCIANO V. WILKINSON, WARDEN; MULLREED V. MICHIGAN ET AL.; LISTER V. MCLEOD, WARDEN; AND PLEDGER V. LOWRY, MEDICAL DIRECTOR, U. S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE HOSPITAL

Citator

Cited By

• Romero v. Int'l Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 (U.S. 1959)
  …overy of the Spanish counterpart of maintenance and cure. These rights under the Spanish law may be enforced through the Spanish consul in New York. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, 244 F. 2d 409. We granted certiorari, 355 U. S. 807, because of the conflict among Courts of Appeals as to the proper construction of the relevant provision of the Judiciary Act of 1875 (now 28 U. S. C. § 1331) and because of questions raised regarding the applicability of Lauritsen v. Larsen, 345 U.…
• Aston Bartholomew v. Universe Tankships, Inc., 263 F.2d 437 (2d Cir. 1959)
  …F.Supp. 530. In Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., D.C.S.D.N.Y. 1956, 142 F.Supp. 570, affirmed Per Curiam, 2 Cir., 1957, 244 F. 2d 409, this issue was one of the numerous points in contention. The Supreme Court has granted certiorari, 355 U.S. 807, 78 S.Ct. 55, 2 L.Ed.2d 27. . It should be unnecessary to add that in treating the foreign incorporation of appellant as if American for Jones Act purpose, we do not pass upon, nor have we considered, the wholly separate question of similar treatme…