Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Mitchell Vs. W. T. Grant Co.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 13, 1974

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

67 entries 19 linked 48 unlinked
Show
  1. Lindsey Vs. Normet US Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1972
    Relied / Followed
  2. inland Empire Council Vs. Millis US Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1945
  3. Cafeteria Workers Vs. Mcelroy US Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1961
  4. Stanley Vs. Illinois US Supreme Court · Apr 03, 1972
  5. Phillips Vs. Commissioner US Supreme Court · May 25, 1931
  6. GriffIn Vs. Griffin US Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1946
  7. Londoner Vs. Denver US Supreme Court · Jun 01, 1908
  8. Roller Vs. Holly US Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1900
  9. Hovey Vs. Elliott US Supreme Court · May 24, 1897
  10. Scott Vs. Mcneal US Supreme Court · May 14, 1894
  11. Windsor Vs. Mcveigh US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1876
  12. Ray Vs. Norseworthy US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1874
  13. BaldwIn Vs. Hale US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1863
  14. Perry Vs. Sindermann US Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1972
  15. Fuentes Vs. Shevin US Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1972
  16. Bianchi Vs. Morales US Supreme Court · May 07, 1923
    Relied / Followed
  17. Bell Vs. Burson US Supreme Court · May 24, 1971
  18. Vlandis Vs. Kline US Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1973
  19. Arnett Vs. Kennedy US Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1974
  20. possession of the party who is able to furnish protection against loss or damage pending trial on the merits. Fuentes v. Shevin
    Search
  21. under this Court's precedents that issues can be limited in actions for possession. Indeed, in Grant Timber Mfg. Co. v. Gray
    Search
  22. Holmes, J.), the Court upheld such limitations in possessory actions for real property in Louisiana. See also Bianchi v. Morales
    Search
  23. that his case will succeed to warrant the bonded sequestration of the property pending outcome of the suit. Cf. Bell v. Burson
    Search
  24. Ewing v. Mytinger
    Search
  25. NLRB v. Mackay
    Search
  26. is in any way disturbed is nonetheless mandated by a long line of cases in this Court, culminating in Sniadach v. Family
    Search
  27. Finance Corp., 395 U. S. 337 (1969), and Fuentes v. Shevin
    Search
  28. U. S. 589 , 283 U. S. 596 -597 (1931). See also Scottish Union & National Ins. Co. v. Bowland
    Search
  29. Springer Page 416 U. S. 612 v. United
    Search
  30. U. S. 593 -594 (1881). This generality sufficed to decide relatively modern cases. For example, in Ewing v. Mytinger
    Search
  31. Coffin Bros. v. Bennett
    Search
  32. U. S. 29 , 277 U. S. 31 (1928). To the same effect was the earlier case of Ownbey v. Morgan
    Search
  33. Ownbey and Coffin, the Court later sustained the constitutionality of the Maine attachment statute. McKay v. McInnes
    Search
  34. The judgment of the Maine court was affirmed without opinion, citing Ownbey and Coffin. In Sniadach v. Family
    Search
  35. on which he had retained a lien to secure the purchase price. This very case soon came before the Court in Fuentes v. Shevin
    Search
  36. standard is inherently subject to factual determination and adversarial input. As in Bell v. Burson
    Search
  37. s license was suspended without a prior hearing, when the suspension was premised on a fault standard, see Vlandis v. Kline
    Search
  38. private violence, but self-help repossession could easily lessen protections for the debtor. See, for example, Adams v. Southern
    Search
  39. Covey v. Town
    Search
  40. New York v. New
    Search
  41. Mullane v. Central
    Search
  42. Opp Cotton Mills v. Administrator
    Search
  43. United States v. Illinois
    Search
  44. Southern R. Co. v. Virginia
    Search
  45. Goldsmith v. Board
    Search
  46. Coe v. Armour
    Search
  47. Central of Georgia R. Co. v. Wright
    Search
  48. Rees v. City
    Search
  49. conclusive on the issue of probable cause. As a result, the defendant can be arrested and held for trial. See Beavers v. Henkel
    Search
  50. Wright v. Hughes
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial