Citation network
Knowlton Vs. Moore
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 14, 1900
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
-
U.S. 41 (1900) U.S. Supreme Court Knowlton v. MooreSearch
-
of the conception embodied in the act of 1864 with that existing in England was observed by this Court in Scholey v. RewSearch
-
it had not been apportioned. The contention was twice considered by this Court. On the first hearing, in Pollock v. Farmers'Search
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
An inheritance and legacy tax imposed by one of the states (Louisiana) was considered in Mager v. GrimaSearch
-
by Mr. Chief Justice Taney, upheld the right to levy such taxes. The same subject was passed on in United States v. PerkinsSearch
-
Once more, quite recently, the subject was considered in Magoun v. IllinoisSearch
-
of the taxes have been declared, and the principles upon which they are based explained in United States v. PerkinsSearch
-
Strode v. CommonwealthSearch
-
Eyre v. JacobSearch
-
Schoolfield v. LynchburgSearch
-
State v. DalrympleSearch
-
State v. HamlinSearch
-
State v. AlstonSearch
-
Minot v. WinthropSearch
-
Gelsthorpe v. FurnellSearch
-
Mont. 299. See also Scholey v. RewSearch
-
authorities which maintain this doctrine have been already referred to in the citation which we have made from Magoun v. IllinoisSearch
-
Trust & Savings Bank, 170 U. S. 288 . An illustration is found in Page 178 U. S. 58 United States v. PerkinsSearch
-
State v. FerrisSearch
-
State v. GormanSearch
-
Curry v. SpencerSearch
-
N.H. 624. In State v. SwitzlerSearch
-
that the same limitation rests upon the national government in relation to the powers of the several states. Weston v. CharlestonSearch
-
Bank of Commerce v. NewSearch
-
Collector v. DaySearch
-
United States v. RailroadSearch
-
Railroad Co. v. PenistonSearch
-
shows the inapplicability to the case in hand of the statement made by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch v. MarylandSearch
-
out the error in the proposition relied on, and render it unnecessary to do more than refer to them. Lane County v. OregonSearch
-
First Nat. Bank v. CommonwealthSearch
-
California v. CentralSearch
-
the statute when ambiguity exists and a literal interpretation will work out wrong or injury. United States v. FisherSearch
-
United States v. UnionSearch
-
Coosaw Mining Co. v. SouthSearch
-
the significance thereof by expressions used in the course of the debate by certain members of the Senate. Maxwell v. DowSearch
-
the act of 1864 was repealed in 1870. 16 Stat. 256, c. 255. After the repeal, the court was called upon, in Mason v. SargentSearch
-
view is to be avoided if another and more reasonable interpretation is present in the statute. Bate Refrigerating Co. v. SulzbergerSearch
-
Blake v. NationalSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial