Citation network
Pennoyer Vs. Mcconnaughy
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 20, 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
-
U.S. 1 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Pennoyer v. McConnaughySearch
-
U.S. 1 (1891) Pennoyer v. McConnaughySearch
-
Louisiana v. JunelSearch
-
Cunningham v. MaconSearch
-
duty, purely ministerial, is not, within the meaning of the Eleventh Amendment, an action against the state. Osborn v. BankSearch
-
Litchfield v. WebsterSearch
-
Allen v. BaltimoreSearch
-
It is believed that the case before us is within the principles of the great and leading case of Osborn v. BankSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
behind and through the nominal parties on the record to ascertain who are the real parties to the suit. New Hampshire v. LouisianaSearch
-
and New York v. LouisianaSearch
-
In re Ayers, supra. But the general doctrine of Osborn v. BankSearch
-
of cases, notably in those we have referred to as belonging to the second class of cases above mentioned. In Davis v. GraySearch
-
Court. Some of the expressions in the opinion in that case were criticized in the subsequent case of United States v. LeeSearch
-
a number of subsequent cases, and the underlying principles of it are regarded as sound. In Board of Liquidation v. McCombSearch
-
citing Osborn v. BankSearch
-
of the United States and Davis v. GraySearch
-
and authority, and the following from the opinion of the Court, delivered by Mr. Justice Miller in Cunningham v. MaconSearch
-
Ohio Railroad Company, 114 U. S. 311 , decided at the same time as Poindexter v. GreenhowSearch
-
officers of a state in such cases, Mr. Justice Matthews, delivering the opinion of Court, relied largely upon Osborn v. BankSearch
-
of the United States, Board of Liquidation v. McCombSearch
-
and many other cases, and the language above quoted from Board of Liquidation v. McCombSearch
-
was quoted with approval. The case of McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
by virtue of the inhibition contained in the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution, was adverted to in Cunningham v. MaconSearch
-
Brunswick Railroad, where it was said, referring to the case of Davis v. GraySearch
-
law of this state, even though such law might be unconstitutional. The same distinction was pointed out in Hagood v. SouthernSearch
-
U.S. 123 U. S. 500 -501. Page 140 U. S. 18 In Hans v. LouisianaSearch
-
work irreparable damage and mischief to his property rights. The case cannot be distinguished in principle from Osborn v. BankSearch
-
of the United States, Davis v. GraySearch
-
Page 140 U. S. 19 Board of Liquidation v. McCombSearch
-
and Allen v. BaltimoreSearch
-
In Corpe v. BrooksSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Pennoyer v. McConnaughySearch
-
Osborn v. BankSearch
-
of Osborn v. BankSearch
-
In Davis v. GraySearch
-
of United States v. LeeSearch
-
In Board of Liquidation v. McCombSearch
-
of McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
of Davis v. GraySearch
-
In Hans v. LouisianaSearch
-
Poindexter v. GreenhowSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial