Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Humble Pipe Line Vs. Waggonner

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 23, 1964

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

29 entries 4 linked 25 unlinked
Show
  1. Fort Leavenworth R. Co. Vs. Lowe US Supreme Court · May 04, 1885
  2. Arlington Hotel Co. Vs. Fant US Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1929
  3. United States Vs. Unzeuta US Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1930
  4. Palmer Vs. Barrett US Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1896
  5. U.S. 369 (1964) U.S. Supreme Court Humble Pipe Line v. Waggonner
    Search
  6. U.S. 369 (1964) Humble Pipe Line v. Waggonner
    Search
  7. the land in a narrow trading sense. Fort Leavenworth R. Co. v. Lowe
    Search
  8. b) The United States did not lose its exclusive jurisdiction by leasing portions of the property. S.R.A., Inc. v. Minnesota
    Search
  9. that provision. Louisiana concedes that, as we pointed out in our recent Page 376 U. S. 372 holding in Paul v. United
    Search
  10. could, with the State's consent, have acquired exclusive jurisdiction by condemning the land. See also James v. Dravo
    Search
  11. reading of the constitutional provision simply follows the interpretation given it long ago in Fort Leavenworth R. Co. v. Lowe
    Search
  12. power to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over those parts of the area. We cannot agree. We did hold in S.R.A., Inc. v. Minnesota
    Search
  13. jurisdiction was not lost either by lease of property for commercial purposes within an enclave, Arlington Hotel Co. v. Fant
    Search
  14. U. S. 439 , or by conveying a right of way to a railroad across a reservation, United States v. Unzeuta
    Search
  15. Executive Department of the Government to determine what land it will acquire and hold for military purposes. Benson v. United
    Search
  16. State to the Federal Government need not be accepted, and that a refusal to accept may be proved by evidence. Atkinson v. State
    Search
  17. Silas Mason Co. v. Tax
    Search
  18. against its lessee. Cf. United States v. County
    Search
  19. Together with No. 354, Natural Gas & Oil Corp. et al. v. Waggonner
    Search
  20. The deed to the United States was for a fee simple, and, unlike that in Palmer v. Barrett
    Search
  21. International Business Machines Corp. v. Ott
    Search
  22. U.S. Supreme Court Humble Pipe Line v. Waggonner
    Search
  23. S.R.A., Inc. v. Minnesota
    Search
  24. Paul v. United
    Search
  25. James v. Dravo
    Search
  26. Benson v. United
    Search
  27. Atkinson v. State
    Search
  28. Cf. United States v. County
    Search
  29. International Business Machines Corp. v. Ott
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial