Citation network
Colgrove Vs. Battin
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 21, 1973
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
-
U.S. 149 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Colgrove v. BattinSearch
-
U.S. 149 (1973) Colgrove v. BattinSearch
-
denied the writ, 456 F.2d 1379 (1972). We granted certiorari, 409 U.S. 841 (1972). We affirm. I In Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
Parsons v. BedfordSearch
-
Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. RedmanSearch
-
Galloway v. UnitedSearch
-
Walker v. NewSearch
-
Funk v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
and, in criminal and civil cases, to assure a fair and equitable resolution of factual issues, Gasoline Products Co. v. ChamplinSearch
-
American Publishing Co. v. FisherSearch
-
was clearly dictum, and not a decision upon a question presented or litigated. Thus, in Capital Traction Co. v. HofSearch
-
p. 44 (2d ed.1971). See also Cooley v. StricklandSearch
-
Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
stipulation of the parties for a lesser number. Rule 48 was drafted at the time the statement in Capital Traction Co. v. HofSearch
-
Page 413 U. S. 164 See Cooley v. StricklandSearch
-
Cooley v. StricklandSearch
-
judicial reexamination of factfindings of a jury other than as permitted in 1791. Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. RedmanSearch
-
Verdicts in Civil Cases, 44 N.Y.State B.J. 385 (1972). See also Leger v. WestinghouseSearch
-
Winsby v. JohnSearch
-
An Evaluation of Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
group deliberation combined with a likelihood of obtaining a representative cross-section of the community. Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
Cf. Sibbach v. WilsonSearch
-
An amicus argues that the local Rule is invalid under our decision in Miner v. AtlassSearch
-
in jury trials, Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. RedmanSearch
-
before juries, Walker v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 464 , 166 U. S. 468 (1897). See also Dimick v. SchiedtSearch
-
than the panel of three judges condemned in Baldwin v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 66 (1970), or the 12 laymen instructed by a justice of the peace outlawed in Capital Traction Co. v. HofSearch
-
a clear statement from Congress when it legislates at the limit of its constitutional powers, see, e.g., Crowell v. BensonSearch
-
is not settled by the prior decisions of this Court upholding nonunanimous and six-man criminal juries. See Apodaca v. OregonSearch
-
Johnson v. LouisianaSearch
-
of this Court who thought that the Sixth Amendment required unanimous jury verdicts in federal cases. See also Johnson v. LouisianaSearch
-
Id. at 406 U. S. 371 . See also Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
is to be judged by historical standards. Certainly that has been this Court's understanding in the past. In Dimick v. SchiedtSearch
-
Id. at 293 U. S. 490 . In Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. RedmanSearch
-
U.S. at 295 U. S. 657 . And in American Publishing Co. v. FisherSearch
-
Slocum v. NewSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Colgrove v. BattinSearch
-
I In Williams v. FloridaSearch
-
Gasoline Products Co. v. ChamplinSearch
-
See Cooley v. StricklandSearch
-
Leger v. WestinghouseSearch
-
Winsby v. JohnSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial