Citation network
Texas Vs. New Jersey
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 01, 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
-
Texas v. NewSearch
-
Jersey - 379 U.S. 674 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. NewSearch
-
Jersey, 379 U.S. 674 (1965) Texas v. NewSearch
-
and asks only to be protected from the possibility of double liability. Since we held in Western Union Tel. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
it, and that, by that test, Texas has the best claim to escheat every item of property involved here. Cf. Mullane v. CentralSearch
-
Atkinson v. SuperiorSearch
-
Court, 49 Cal.2d 338, 316 P.2d 960, appeals dismissed and cert. denied sub nom. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. AtkinsonSearch
-
property rights subject to the jurisdiction of its courts, a jurisdiction which need not be exclusive. Compare McGee v. InternationalSearch
-
Mullane v. CentralSearch
-
International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSearch
-
Since this Court has held in Western Union Tel. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
E.g., Schmidt v. DriscollSearch
-
Auten v. AutenSearch
-
Haumschild v. ContinentalSearch
-
Casualty Co., 7 Wis.2d 130, 95 N.W.2d 814. See also Clay v. SunSearch
-
Watson v. EmployersSearch
-
Richards v. UnitedSearch
-
regulate activities affecting the State, power which, like court jurisdiction, need not be exclusive. Compare Osborn v. OzlinSearch
-
according to which intangible personal property is found at the domicile of its owner. See Blodgett v. SilbermanSearch
-
Baldwin v. MissouriSearch
-
Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. MinnesotaSearch
-
allow an unpaid creditor to garnish a debt owing to his debtor wherever the person owing that debt is found. Harris v. BalkSearch
-
U. S. 215 . But cf. New York Life Ins. Co. v. DunlevySearch
-
Cf. Connecticut Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. MooreSearch
-
U. S. 541 . As was pointed out in Western Union Tel. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
intangible property decided the possible effect of conflicting claims of other States. Compare Standard Oil Co. v. NewSearch
-
Connecticut Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. MooreSearch
-
Anderson National Bank v. LuckettSearch
-
intangible property when the whereabouts of the creditor are unknown. See Western Union Tel. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
the creditor has disappeared, the State of the debtor's domicile may escheat the intangible property. Standard Oil Co. v. NewSearch
-
Anderson Nat. Bank v. LuckettSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. NewSearch
-
Western Union Tel. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Cf. Mullane v. CentralSearch
-
Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. AtkinsonSearch
-
Compare McGee v. InternationalSearch
-
Clay v. SunSearch
-
Richards v. UnitedSearch
-
Compare Osborn v. OzlinSearch
-
See Blodgett v. SilbermanSearch
-
Baldwin v. MissouriSearch
-
Harris v. BalkSearch
-
States. Compare Standard Oil Co. v. NewSearch
-
See Western Union Tel. Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Standard Oil Co. v. NewSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial