Citation network
Pana Vs. Bowler
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 05, 1883
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
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 529 (1883) U.S. Supreme Court Pana v. BowlerSearch
-
U.S. 529 (1883) Pana v. BowlerSearch
-
The court reaffirms the ruling in Harter v. KernochanSearch
-
and the new company succeeded to all the rights, franchises, and powers of the constituent companies. Harter v. KernochanSearch
-
the amount which could be donated by a township to the railroad company. United States v. TynenSearch
-
under the circumstances of this case, to issue the bonds in question. This Court has decided in the case of Harter v. KernochanSearch
-
be certified Page 107 U. S. 540 on the face of the bonds by the authorities whose primary duty it. Lynde v. TheSearch
-
Commissioners v. JanuarySearch
-
Commissioners v. BollesSearch
-
called to the decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois in the case heretofore mentioned and reported as Lippincott v. TownSearch
-
void, and the issue of the bonds was therefore without authority. Our attention is also called to the cases of People v. SantaSearch
-
Anna, 67 Ill. 57, and People v. TownSearch
-
no obligation to follow implicitly the conclusions of any other court, however learned or able it may be. Swift v. TysonSearch
-
Butz v. MuscatineSearch
-
Oates v. NatSearch
-
Railroad Company v. NationalSearch
-
Bank, 102 U. S. 14 . See also Burgess v. SeligmanSearch
-
on the subject stated with precision. We cannot follow the decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois in Lippincott v. TownSearch
-
overruling a uniform current of the decisions of this Court, beginning with the case of Commissioners of Knox County v. AspinwallSearch
-
facie presumption that he became the holder of it, for value at its date, in the usual course of business. Murray v. LardnerSearch
-
S. 474 . And municipal bonds, payable to bearer, are subject to the same rules as other negotiable paper. Cromwell v. SacSearch
-
insists that this case falls within an exception to that rule, and cites to sustain his position the cases of Smith v. SacSearch
-
County, 11 Wall, 139, and Stewart v. LansingSearch
-
of the instrument, the burden of proof is thrown on the plaintiff to show that he is a holder for value. Smith v. SacSearch
-
County and Stewart v. LansingSearch
-
Commissioners v. ClarkSearch
-
Fitch v. JonesSearch
-
Smith v. BraneSearch
-
Hall v. FeatherstoneSearch
-
Bailey v. BidwellSearch
-
Vathir v. ZaneSearch
-
Hutchinson v. BoggsSearch
-
Perring v. NoyesSearch
-
Cottle v. CleavesSearch
-
Sistermans v. FieldSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial