ANDREWS

v.

UNITED STATES; CONSOLIDATION COAL CO. V. SOUTH-EAST COAL CO.; UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA V. SOUTH-EAST COAL CO.; CHATFIELD V. CALIFORNIA; LEVIN V. PROBATION DEPARTMENT OF CITY OF NEW YORK; SUMMERS V. TEXAS; KNUCKLES ET AL. V. PRASSE, CORRECTION COMMISSIONER, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Reynoso-Ulloa, 548 F.2d 1329 (9th Cir. 1977)
  …s of entrapment necessary to decide the case. Hampton v. United States, supra; United States v. Russell, supra; United States v. Griffin, 434 F. 2d 978, 981-982 (9 Cir. 1970),24 cert. denied, 402 U.S. 995, 91 S.Ct. 2170, 29 L.Ed.2d 160, reh. denied, 404 U.S. 877, 92 S.Ct. 27, 30 L.Ed.2d 124 (1971). IV. Perjury [H] Sheen testified that prior to the transaction involved in this case, he made trips to Charlotte, North Carolina and Daytona, Florida with Mummert to attend stock car races, and that during these…
• Hobart Bros. Co. v. Malcolm T. Gilliland, Inc., 471 F.2d 894 (5th Cir. 1973)
  …000 in damages. The credibility of the witnesses in showing damages is for the jury, South-East Coal Company v. Consolidation Coal Company, 6 Cir., 1970, 434 F. 2d 767, 794, cert. denied 402 U.S. 983, 91 S.Ct. 1662, 29 L.Ed.2d 149, rehearing denied 404 U.S. 877, 92 S.Ct. 28, 30 L.Ed.2d 124. The fact finders may act on probability and inference, Locklin v. Day-Glo Color Corporation, supra, 429 F. 2d at 880. Hobart complains that it was error for Dr. Dietz to calculate from January 1, 1964, rather than from…
• McCRAY v. Burrell, 516 F.2d 357 (4th Cir. 1975)
  …35 (4 Cir. 1966); two and one-half days of isolated confinement, Knuckles v. Prasse, 302 F.Supp. 1036, 1062 (E.D.Pa.1969), aff’d per curiam, 435 F. 2d 1255 (3 Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 403 U.S. 936, 91 S.Ct. 2262, 29 L.Ed.2d 717 (1971), reh. denied, 404 U.S. 877, 92 S.Ct. 33, 30 L.Ed.2d 125 (1971). . On remand the evidence may show that Smith discharged his duty by notifying a superior whom he reasonably expected would properly notify a psychologist or psychiatrist. Indeed, it may even appear that the supe…