Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Bolles Vs. Outing Company

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 04, 1899

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 9 linked 26 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Wiltberger US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1820
  2. United States Vs. Reese US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1875
  3. Chittenden Vs. Brewster US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1864
  4. Clark Vs. Killian US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1880
  5. Cherokee Nation Vs. Blackfeather US Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1894
  6. Brady Vs. Daly US Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1899
  7. Thornton Vs. Schreiber US Supreme Court · Feb 13, 1888
  8. Backus Vs. Gould US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1849
  9. United States Vs. Hartwell US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1867
  10. Bolles v. Outing
    Search
  11. Company - 175 U.S. 262 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Bolles v. Outing
    Search
  12. Company, 175 U.S. 262 (1899) Bolles v. Outing
    Search
  13. specified sum. In this respect, it differs wholly from the following section (4966) recently considered by us in Brady v. Daly
    Search
  14. recovers a moiety for the use of the United States, though perhaps this is not beyond a doubt suggested in Thornton v. Schreiber
    Search
  15. substitute, and of the sixth section of which section 4965 is a substantial copy, was said by this Court, in Backus v. Gould
    Search
  16. it would if the statute were remedial. In both cases, it will endeavor to effect substantial justice. United States v. Hartwell
    Search
  17. American Fur Co. v. United
    Search
  18. edition for the purpose of relieving himself from the penalty. This case is clearly controlled by that of Backus v. Gould
    Search
  19. That case was decided in 1849, and must be regarded as overruling anything to be found to the contrary in Reed v. Carusi
    Search
  20. Dwight v. Appleton
    Search
  21. Fed.Cases 432, decided in 1843, and Millett v. Snowden
    Search
  22. Fed.Cases 374, decided in 1844. The case of Thornton v. Schreiber
    Search
  23. against the firm, and that they were the proper parties to be made defendants. The same argument was made as in Backus v. Gould
    Search
  24. Sons, and that he held them merely as their employee, subject always to their order and control. While Backus v. Gould
    Search
  25. is not cited in the opinion, the case is a distinct affirmance of that. See also Sarony v. Ehrich
    Search
  26. not take out a writ of error, and cannot now be heard to complain of any adverse rulings in the court below. Canter v. American
    Search
  27. Loudon v. Shelby
    Search
  28. U.S. Supreme Court Bolles v. Outing
    Search
  29. of Backus v. Gould
    Search
  30. Reed v. Carusi
    Search
  31. and Millett v. Snowden
    Search
  32. of Thornton v. Schreiber
    Search
  33. While Backus v. Gould
    Search
  34. Sarony v. Ehrich
    Search
  35. Canter v. American
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial