Citation network
Swift and Co. Vs. Wickham
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 22, 1965
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
-
Swift & Co. v. WickhamSearch
-
U.S. 111 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Swift & Co. v. WickhamSearch
-
U.S. 111 (1965) Swift & Co. v. WickhamSearch
-
Ex parte Bransford, 310 U. S. 354 , and Case v. BowlesSearch
-
Pp. 382 U. S. 120 -122. (c) The holding in Kesler v. DepartmentSearch
-
California Water Service Co. v. CitySearch
-
in concluding that the question of a three-judge court turned on the proper application of our 1962 decision in Kesler v. DepartmentSearch
-
through the creation of regulatory bodies, met with opposition in the federal judiciary. In Chicago, M. & St.P. R. Co. v. MinnesotaSearch
-
if a state measure conflicts with a federal requirement, the state provision must give way. Gibbons v. OgdenSearch
-
U.S. at 310 U. S. 358 -359. Page 382 U. S. 122 In a third case, Case v. BowlesSearch
-
and cases involving statutory preemption or conflict remained firm until Kesler v. DepartmentSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Phillips v. UnitedSearch
-
considerations of judicial administration. As Mr. Justice Frankfurter observed in Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. JacobsenSearch
-
Oklahoma Gas Elec. Co. v. OklahomaSearch
-
Rorick v. BoardSearch
-
prejudice to litigants when the jurisdiction of a three-judge court is unclear has been used before, see Query v. UnitedSearch
-
E.g., Spooner v. McConnellSearch
-
Senator Overman was probably referring to Southern R. Co. v. McNeillSearch
-
This basic rule has been reiterated in other familiar cases where the facts did not require its application. See Query v. UnitedSearch
-
other not insubstantial constitutional claims had been clearly asserted. In Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. JacobsenSearch
-
See Borden Co. v. LiddySearch
-
American Travelers Club, Inc. v. HostetterSearch
-
See, in addition to the case before us, Bartlett Co. v. StateSearch
-
the voiding of a state statute for inconsistency with the state constitution. Cf. Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. JacobsenSearch
-
of the challenged statute was based upon a conflict between state and federal statutes. Kesler v. DepartmentSearch
-
so inclusive as to preempt state action in the particular area. One of the earliest and most tumultuous was Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
arising in various contexts. The storm against Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
where the Supremacy Clause is thought to require state policy to give way. A fairly recent example is Cloverleaf Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
program for control of renovated butter -- a demonstrably important health measure. The Court, in Florida Lime Growers v. JacobsenSearch
-
court system. On reflection, I think that result better reflects congressional policy even though, as in Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
is the final touchstone, the interests which must be taken into account in either case are much the same, as Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
Thus, the dissent in Cloverleaf Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
Rice v. SantaSearch
-
U. S. 297 . Cf. Hostetter v. IdlewildSearch
-
did not concern the three-judge court problem, but the broader aspects envisaged by such cases as Pennsylvania v. NelsonSearch
-
U. S. 497 , Phillips Petroleum Co. v. WisconsinSearch
-
U. S. 672 , Slochower v. BoardSearch
-
of Education, 350 U. S. 551 , Railway Employes v. HansonSearch
-
U. S. 225 , and Cloverleaf Co. v. PattersonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Swift & Co. v. WickhamSearch
-
and Case v. BowlesSearch
-
Kesler v. DepartmentSearch
-
In Chicago, M. & St.P. R. Co. v. MinnesotaSearch
-
Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. JacobsenSearch
-
Query v. UnitedSearch
-
Southern R. Co. v. McNeillSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial