From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Singer Co. v. Perma Research & Development Co.

U.S.
Nov 29, 1976
429 U.S. 987 (1976)

Summary

applying New York law

Summary of this case from Independence Tube Corp. v. Copperweld Corp.

Opinion

No. 76-509.

November 29, 1976.


ORDERS

C.A. 2d Cir. Motion of SCM Corp. for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae and certiorari denied. Reported below: 542 F. 2d 111.


Summaries of

Singer Co. v. Perma Research & Development Co.

U.S.
Nov 29, 1976
429 U.S. 987 (1976)

applying New York law

Summary of this case from Independence Tube Corp. v. Copperweld Corp.

In Doyle v. Ohio, 429 U.S. 987 (1976), the United States Supreme Court held that the use for impeachment purposes of a defendant's silence at the time of arrest and after receiving Miranda warnings violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Summary of this case from Coleman v. State
Case details for

Singer Co. v. Perma Research & Development Co.

Case Details

Full title:SINGER Co. v. PERMA RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT Co

Court:U.S.

Date published: Nov 29, 1976

Citations

429 U.S. 987 (1976)

Citing Cases

Permanence Corp. v. Kennametal, Inc.

While the phrase "best efforts" is often used to describe the extent of the implied undertaking, this has…

In re Isringhausen

It is well settled that the word "may" in the statutory phrase, "[a] continuation statement may be filed . .…