Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re Gilbert

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1927
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/94881

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
275 U.S. 499
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re Gilbert

Excerpt

in re gilbert - 275 u.s. 499 (1927) u.s. supreme court in re gilbert, 275 u.s. 499 (1927) 275 u.s. 499 no. ___, original. in re abraham s. gilbert. supreme court of the united states november 21, 1927 it is ordered that the clerk issue a rule returnable monday, december 12, 1927, addressed to abraham s. gilbert, of new york city, member of this bar, which shall direct- that he make written report to this court showing what fees or allowances have been paid to him (also when and by whom paid) for services as master in the several causes reviewed here during the october term, 1921, and reported in 259 u.s. 101 , 42 s. ct. 438, under the following titles: newton, as attorney general of the state of new york, et al., v. consolidated gas company of new york; same v. new york & queens gas company; same v. central union gas company; same v. northern union gas company; same v. new york mutual gas light company; same v. standard gas light company of the city of new york; same v. new amsterdam gas company; same v. east river gas company of long island city. that he likewise report whether he had returned or repaid any portion of the fees or allowances received by him as such master, with dates and names of the parties. page 275 u.s. 499, 500 that if he has received fees or allowances as master in any of the specified causes exceeding the maximum amount held by us to be permissible, and has not returned or repaid the excess, then he shall show cause why his name ought not to be stricken from the roll of attorneys permitted to practice here and he be punished for contempt or otherwise dealt with as the circumstances may require.

Full Judgment

IN RE GILBERT - 275 U.S. 499 (1927)
U.S. Supreme Court IN RE GILBERT, 275 U.S. 499 (1927)

275 U.S. 499

No. ___, original.

In re Abraham S. GILBERT.

Supreme Court of the United States

November 21, 1927

It is ordered that the clerk issue a rule returnable Monday, December 12, 1927, addressed to Abraham S. Gilbert, of New York City, member of this bar, which shall direct-

That he make written report to this Court showing what fees or allowances have been paid to him (also when and by whom paid) for services as master in the several causes reviewed here during the October term, 1921, and reported in 259 U.S. 101 , 42 S. Ct. 438, under the following titles:

Newton, as Attorney General of the State of New York, et al., v. Consolidated Gas Company of New York; Same v. New York & Queens Gas Company; Same v. Central Union Gas Company; Same v. Northern Union Gas Company; Same v. New York Mutual Gas Light Company; Same v. Standard Gas Light Company of the City of New York; Same v. New Amsterdam Gas Company; Same v. East River Gas Company of Long Island City.

That he likewise report whether he had returned or repaid any portion of the fees or allowances received by him as such master, with dates and names of the parties.

Page 275 U.S. 499, 500

That if he has received fees or allowances as master in any of the specified causes exceeding the maximum amount held by us to be permissible, and has not returned or repaid the excess, then he shall show cause why his name ought not to be stricken from the roll of attorneys permitted to practice here and he be punished for contempt or otherwise dealt with as the circumstances may require.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial