PEREZ

v.

CALIFORNIA

Citator

Cited By

• Bradley v. United States, 433 F.2d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 1969)
  …stion, and had heard argument in that case four days prior to oral argument before us. Eor this reason, we entered an order sua sponte postponing our decision until after the Supreme Court’s disposition of Perez. Now that Perez has been disposed of, 395 U.S. 208, 89 S'.Ct. 1767, 23 L.Ed.2d 212 (1969), see note 66, infra, we now finalize our views in this opinion. . “Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whethe…

  ← 1 / 4 →
• Newburger v. Gross, 563 F.2d 1057 (2d Cir. 1977)
  …3(b), unless it [*1071] rests upon an independent jurisdictional ground. United States v. Heyward-Robinson Company, supra, 430 F. 2d at 1080-81; O’Connell v. Erie Lackawanna R.R. Co., 391 F. 2d 156, 163 (2d Cir. 1968), vacated as moot, 395 U.S. 210, 89 S.Ct. 1767, 23 L.Ed.2d 213 (1969); Lesnik v. Public Industrials Corporation, 144 F. 2d 968, 976 n. 10 (2d Cir. 1944). Although there has been some criticism of the requirement of an independent jurisdictional ground for permissive counterclaims, see United S…
• United States v. The Heyward-Robinson Co., Inc., 430 F.2d 1077 (2d Cir. 1970)
  …if they are permissive there is no Federal jurisdiction over them unless they rest on independent jurisdictional grounds. O'Connell v. Erie Lackawanna R. R. Co., 391 F. 2d 156, 163 (2d Cir. 1968), vacated and ordered dismissed as moot, 395 U.S. 210, 89 S.Ct. 1767, 23 L.Ed.2d 213 (1969); Lesnik v. Public Industrials Corporation, 144 F. 2d 968, 976 n. 10 (2d Cir. 1944); Fraser v. Astra Steamship Corp., 18 F.R.D. 240, 241-242 (S.D.N.Y.1955) ; Telegraph Delivery Service v. Florists Tel. Service, 12 F.R.D. 342 (S…

Authorities Cited

• Perez v. California, 393 U.S. 812 (U.S. 1968)