Citation network
Mccullough Vs. Virginia
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 05, 1898
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
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 102 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court McCullough v. VirginiaSearch
-
U.S. 102 (1898) McCullough v. VirginiaSearch
-
where the writ would lie according to the principles of the common law, and in Page 172 U. S. 104 Antoni v. WrightSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
from the treasurer a return of the money paid. The various features of this act are specifically pointed out in Antoni v. GreenhowSearch
-
prolific of many cases, both in the state and federal courts, not a few of which finally came to this Court. Hartman v. GreenhowSearch
-
Stewart v. VirginiaSearch
-
the passage of the Act of March 7, 1872, which in terms required all taxes to be paid in cash, the case of Antoni v. WrightSearch
-
embraced in the coupon provision of the act of 1871. This decision was reaffirmed in Page 172 U. S. 107 Wise v. RogersSearch
-
Clark v. TylerSearch
-
Gratt. 135, decided April 4, 1878, and again in Williamson v. MasseySearch
-
Gratt. 237, decided April 29, 1880. In Greenhow v. VashonSearch
-
of the validity of the act of 1871. There has been no dissonance in the declarations from the first case, Hartman v. GreenhowSearch
-
to McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
to use them in payment of state taxes and public dues. Page 172 U. S. 108 This was determined in Hartman v. GreenhowSearch
-
in Antoni v. GreenhowSearch
-
Since the decision of the Court of Appeals of Virginia in Antoni v. WrightSearch
-
reference may be had to the opinion of Mr. Justice Bradley in the several cases reported under the title of McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
ourselves with reiterating that which was said by Mr. Justice Bradley, speaking for the entire Court, in McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
and that in reference to the matter of contracts alleged to have been impaired. This was distinctly affirmed in Bank v. SkellySearch
-
The doctrine thus announced has been uniformly followed. Bridge Proprietors v. HobokenSearch
-
Douglas v. KentuckySearch
-
U. S. 501 , and cases cited therein. 3. It is urged that our last decision -- that in McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
But the court overlooks that which was in fact decided in the eight cases reported under the title of McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
its operation. Indeed, the Court of Appeals does not follow what it calls the logic of the decision in McGahey v. VirginiaSearch
-
U. S. 114 because the whole consideration is the basis of the whole promise. The parts are inseparable. Widoe v. WebbSearch
-
To like effect are the decisions of this Court. In United States v. BradleySearch
-
So, in Gelpcke v. CitySearch
-
of that act, and adjudges it void. In support of this proposition, the rule laid down in New Orleans Water Works Co. v. LouisianaSearch
-
Sugar Refining Co., 125 U. S. 18 , 125 U. S. 38 , reaffirmed in Huntington v. AttrillSearch
-
U. S. 657 , 146 U. S. 684 , and Bacon v. TexasSearch
-
by some subsequent statute of the state which has been upheld or effect given it by the state court. Lehigh Water Co. v. EastonSearch
-
New Orleans Water Works Co. v. LouisianaSearch
-
prevent a state from nullifying by its legislation a contract which it has made, or authorized to be made. In Hickie v. StarkeSearch
-
And in Willson v. BlackbirdSearch
-
discussed and decided. . . . This Court has repeatedly decided in favor of its jurisdiction in such a case. Martin v. Hunter'sSearch
-
Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304, Miller v. NicholsSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court McCullough v. VirginiaSearch
-
Antoni v. WrightSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial