Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Mobile Vs. Watson

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 04, 1886

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

35 entries 3 linked 32 unlinked
Show
  1. Mount Pleasant Vs. Beckwith US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1879
  2. Edwards Vs. Kearzey US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1877
  3. Broughton Vs. Pensacola US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1876
  4. U.S. 289 (1886) U.S. Supreme Court Mobile v. Watson
    Search
  5. U.S. 289 (1886) Mobile v. Watson
    Search
  6. of the bonds and coupons sued on. The validity of the judgment in the case of The Port of Mobile, Plaintiff in Error v. Watson
    Search
  7. In Girard v. Philadelphia
    Search
  8. of its name, did not destroy its identity or impair its right to hold property devised to it. So, in Broughton v. Pensacola
    Search
  9. In O'Connor v. Memphis
    Search
  10. In Mount Pleasant v. Beckwith
    Search
  11. to pay them by levying taxes upon the property transferred and the persons residing therein. See also Colchester v. Seaber
    Search
  12. Cuddon v. Eastwick
    Search
  13. People v. Morris
    Search
  14. New Orleans Railroad Co. v. City
    Search
  15. of New Orleans, 26 La.Ann. 478. In the case of Amy v. Selma
    Search
  16. the two cases is an immaterial one. The Supreme Court of Alabama, in the case of Mobile & Spring Hill Railroad Co. v. Kennerly
    Search
  17. largely of fields, swamps, and land covered with water, will not serve to distinguish this case from the case of Amy v. Selma
    Search
  18. their obligations are secured by all the guarantees which protect the engagements of private individuals. Broughton v. Pensacola
    Search
  19. for the payment of the bonds is forbidden by the Constitution of the United States and is null and void. Von Hoffman v. Quincy
    Search
  20. Ralls County Court v. United
    Search
  21. Louisville v. Pillsbury
    Search
  22. Louisiana v. Mayor
    Search
  23. receive strong support from the decisions of the Supreme Court of Alabama. Commissioners of Limestone County v. Rather
    Search
  24. Edwards v. Williamson
    Search
  25. Slaughter v. Mobile
    Search
  26. and ineffectual, and will be disregarded. MR. JUSTICE FIELD, when delivering the judgment of this Court in Wolff v. New
    Search
  27. And so, in Ralls County Court v. United
    Search
  28. U.S. Supreme Court Mobile v. Watson
    Search
  29. Error v. Watson
    Search
  30. Colchester v. Seaber
    Search
  31. of Amy v. Selma
    Search
  32. of Mobile & Spring Hill Railroad Co. v. Kennerly
    Search
  33. Von Hoffman v. Quincy
    Search
  34. of the Supreme Court of Alabama. Commissioners of Limestone County v. Rather
    Search
  35. Wolff v. New
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial