Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Crutcher Vs. Kentucky

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 25, 1891

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

46 entries 11 linked 35 unlinked
Show
  1. Mccall Vs. California US Supreme Court · May 19, 1890
  2. Asher Vs. Texas US Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1888
  3. Stoutenburgh Vs. Hennick US Supreme Court · Jan 14, 1889
  4. Paul Vs. Virginia US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1869
  5. Beer Company Vs. Massachusetts US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1877
  6. Stone Vs. Mississippi US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1879
  7. Mugler Vs. Kansas US Supreme Court · Dec 05, 1887
  8. Powell Vs. Pennsylvania US Supreme Court · Apr 09, 1888
  9. Kidd Vs. Pearson US Supreme Court · Oct 22, 1888
  10. Kimmish Vs. Ball US Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1889
  11. Bank of Augusta Vs. Earle US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1839
  12. U.S. 47 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Crutcher v. Kentucky
    Search
  13. U.S. 47 (1891) Crutcher v. Kentucky
    Search
  14. S. 51 statement. The Supreme Court of Kentucky, in disposing of the case, gave the following opinion ( Crutcher v. Commonwealth
    Search
  15. It seems to us that the case of Woodward v. Commonwealth
    Search
  16. The court then referred to the cases of Smith v. Alabama
    Search
  17. Railway v. Alabama
    Search
  18. of state legislation, but within that of national legislation. Inman Steamship Co. Page 141 U. S. 58 v. Tinker
    Search
  19. commerce as it is with regard to foreign commerce. No difference is perceivable between the two. Telegraph Co. v. Texas
    Search
  20. Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  21. Phila. Steamship Co. v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  22. Norfolk & Western Railroad v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  23. out a license for carrying on interstate commerce, no matter how specious the pretext may be for imposing it. Pickard v. Pullman
    Search
  24. Robbins v. Shelby
    Search
  25. Leloup v. Mobile
    Search
  26. Norfolk & Western Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  27. U. S. 114 . As a summation of the whole matter, it was aptly said by the present CHIEF JUSTICE in Lyng v. Michigan
    Search
  28. is confined to points and places wholly within the state. The cases to this effect are numerous. Bank of Augusta v. Earle
    Search
  29. Liverpool Insurance Company v. Massachusetts
    Search
  30. Cooper Manufacturing Company v. Ferguson
    Search
  31. Phila. Fire Association v. New
    Search
  32. to regulate the operations of foreign and interstate commerce. We have lately expressly decided in the case of Leisy v. Hardin
    Search
  33. a modified way. Such things are properly subject to the police power of the state. Chief Justice Marshall, in Brown v. Maryland
    Search
  34. gambling, horse racing, or anything else that the legislature may deem opposed to the public welfare. Bartemeyer v. Iowa
    Search
  35. Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde
    Search
  36. Foster v. Kansas
    Search
  37. U.S. Supreme Court Crutcher v. Kentucky
    Search
  38. Crutcher v. Commonwealth
    Search
  39. of Woodward v. Commonwealth
    Search
  40. of Smith v. Alabama
    Search
  41. Telegraph Co. v. Texas
    Search
  42. Pickard v. Pullman
    Search
  43. Lyng v. Michigan
    Search
  44. of Leisy v. Hardin
    Search
  45. Brown v. Maryland
    Search
  46. Bartemeyer v. Iowa
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial