CHISHOLM-MOORE HOIST CORP.

v.

CARLSON

Citator

Cited By (43 total)

• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 380 U.S. 374 (U.S. 1965)
  …eral Trade Comm’n, 361 U. S. 818; Mohawk Ref. Corp. v. Federal Trade Comm’n, 263 F. 2d 818 (C. A. 3d Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 361 U. S. 814. E. g., Niresk Industries, Inc. v. Federal Trade Comm’n, 278 F. 2d 337 (C. A. 7th Cir. 1960), cert. denied, 364 U. S. 883. E. g., Niresk Industries, Inc. v. Federal Trade Comm’n, supra, note 19; Howe v. Federal Trade Comm’n, 148 F. 2d 561 (C. A. 9th Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 326 U. S. 741. See, e. g., Stipulation 9083, 55 F. T. C. 2101 (1958); Stipulation 8966, 54 F.…
• Farner v. Paccar, Inc., 562 F.2d 518 (8th Cir. 1977)
  …nction existed in the.:Farner truck and that this malfunction resulted; in loss of vehicle control. See Cunningham v. Gans, 507 F. 2d 496, 500 (2nd Cir. 1974); Carlson v. Chisholm-Moore Hoist Corporation, 281 F. 2d 766, 772 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 883, 81 S.Ct. 172, 5 L.Ed.2d 104 (1960). This evidence tends to make the desired inference more probable than it would be without it, see Fed.R.Evid. 401, and its admission was not an abuse of discretion. Paccar also argues that there was insufficien…
• Goldwater v. Ginzburg, 414 F.2d 324 (2d Cir. 1969)
  …ntrary, not to mention the clear provisions of Rule 43(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Transportation Line v. Hope, 95 U.S. 297, 24 L.Ed. 477 (1877); Carlson, v. Chisholm-Moore Hoist Corporation, 281 F. 2d 766 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 883, 81 S.Ct. 172, 5 L.Ed.2d 104 (1960); see also Wigmore, Evidence §§ 1920 and 1921 (3d ed.). Second, the cases from other circuits cited by appellants do not support their contention in the context of this record, for they only hold that an expert may…