Arcambel v. Wiseman
Cases that cite this one
132 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Barnes v. Oklahoma Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. (Okla. 2001)
- Nantkwest, Inc. v. Matal (Fed. Cir. 2017)
- EIU Group, Inc. v. Citibank Delaware, Inc. (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2006)
- Misener Marine Construction, Inc. v. Norfolk Dredging Co. (11th Cir. 2010)
- Public Entity Pool for Liability v. Score (S.D. 2003)
- In re Niles (N.J. 2003)
- Irwin v. Surdyk's Liquor (Minn. 1999)
- John C. Shimman v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 18 (6th Cir. 1984)
- Weiss v. Bruno (Wash. 1974)
- L. Bucki & Son Lumber Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland (5th Cir. 1901)
- Kunze v. Baylor (5th Cir. 2026)
- Agma Security Service, Inc. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2022)
- Agma Security Service, Inc. v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2022)
- Eastern Shore Title Co. v. Ochse (Md. 2017)
- Brandon v. Sherwood (In re Sann) (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Montana 2016)
- Milo Shammas v. Margaret Focarino (4th Cir. 2015)
- Baker Botts L.L.P. v. ASARCO LLC (Supreme Court of the United States 2015)
- Baker Botts L.L.P. v. ASARCO LLC (Supreme Court of the United States 2015)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco v. Ward (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)
- Shawn Gibson v. Solideal USA, Inc. (6th Cir. 2012)
- Bkcap, LLC v. Captec Franchise Trust 2000-1 (District Court, N.D. Indiana 2010)
- Wise v. Kansas City Life Insurance (District Court, N.D. Mississippi 2006)
- GFI, Inc. v. Franklin Corp. (District Court, N.D. Mississippi 2002)
- Potomac Residence Club v. Western World Insurance (D.C. 1998)
- Johnston v. Arbitrium (Cayman Islands) Handels AG (Del. 1998)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
:—We do not think that this charge ought to be allowed. The general pra£lice of the United States is in opofttion to it; and even if that pratftice. were not ftridtly correct in principle, it is entitled to the refpeét of the court, till it is changed, or modified, by ftatute. ; ■
There are feveral ways in which the- charge may be expunged: l?ut we recommend, as, perhaps, the eafieft way; that the counfel for the Defendant in error, ihould enter a remitti . tur for the amount. .
A remittitur was accordingly entered.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.