Citation network
YellIn Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 17, 1963
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
Yellin v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 374 U.S. 109 (1963) U.S. Supreme Court Yellin v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 374 U.S. 109 (1963) Yellin v. UnitedSearch
-
It has been long settled, of course, that rules of Congress and its committees are judicially cognizable. Christoffel v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. SmithSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 1 . And a legislative committee has been held to observance of its rules, Christoffel v. UnitedSearch
-
States, supra, just as, more frequently, executive agencies have been. See, e.g., Vitarelli v. SeatonSearch
-
should be given such a practice of Page 374 U. S. 117 the Committee in construing its rules, United States v. SmithSearch
-
had a right to have considered. His position is similar to that of the petitioner in United States ex rel. Accardi v. ShaughnessySearch
-
petitioner could obtain an injunction against the Committee that would protect him from public exposure. See Pauling v. EastlandSearch
-
U. S. 168 , 103 U. S. 201 -205. Cf. Tenney v. BrandhoveSearch
-
the mistaken but good faith belief that his rights had been violated, his mistake of law would be no defense. Watkins v. UnitedSearch
-
Sinclair v. UnitedSearch
-
of a question, if he asks for it, it appears he may lose that right if he fails to make a timely objection. See Deutch v. UnitedSearch
-
Barenblatt v. UnitedSearch
-
Watkins v. UnitedSearch
-
other instances in which a witness' defense has been rejected because he failed to make timely objection, see McPhaul v. UnitedSearch
-
Hartman v. UnitedSearch
-
After conferring with counsel, petitioner refused to answer the question. He cited decisions of this Court in Watkins v. UnitedSearch
-
Sweezy v. NewSearch
-
Congress trial, an objection must have been relied upon and asserted before the congressional committee. United States v. BryanSearch
-
McPhaul v. UnitedSearch
-
Eisler v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. KaminSearch
-
any difference in his willingness to answer questions. The Court considered a similar situation in United States v. BryanSearch
-
Explaining an analogous case, Hale v. HenkelSearch
-
for refusing to answer the ground that the Committee was seeking only to expose him for exposure's sake. See Watkins v. UnitedSearch
-
and that he had a right under the rules of the Committee to have his reputational interest considered. Compare Watkins v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 354 U. S. 178 , and Sweezy v. NewSearch
-
asserted at the hearing. The Committee is obliged to make clear the demands which it makes upon the witness. Quinn v. UnitedSearch
-
which a house or committee of Congress chooses to run its business ordinarily raises no justiciable controversy. Field v. ClarkSearch
-
Flint v. StoneSearch
-
Christoffel v. UnitedSearch
-
Barry v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Yellin v. UnitedSearch
-
See Pauling v. EastlandSearch
-
Cf. Tenney v. BrandhoveSearch
-
See Deutch v. UnitedSearch
-
See Watkins v. UnitedSearch
-
Compare Watkins v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial