Citation network
Murphy Vs. Utter
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 19, 1902
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. 95 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Murphy v. UtterSearch
-
U.S. 95 (1902) Murphy v. UtterSearch
-
the board at the time the peremptory writ is issued may be compelled to obey it. As it was decided in Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
and were known to the Loan Commissioners at the time the original answer was filed and before the case of Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
bonds were made payable. The entire issue was declared to be void by this Court Page 186 U. S. 97 in Lewis v. PimaSearch
-
the order of the supreme court of the territory and remanded the case to that court for further proceedings. Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
ground that the same had been filed without leave of the court, and that, under the decision of this Court in Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
BROWN delivered the opinion of the Court. While upon the former hearing of this case, under the name of Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Wayne County v. KennicottSearch
-
duty, and the delinquency is that of the board in its corporate capacity. The earliest case is that of The Secretary v. McGarrahanSearch
-
against him without notice or opportunity to be heard. The same question was more fully considered in United States v. BoutwellSearch
-
an individual, but of a body of men in their collective capacity. These were followed by Warner Valley Stock Co. v. SmithSearch
-
office, and could not afterwards be maintained against the Commissioner alone. In United States ex Rel. Bernardin v. ButterworthSearch
-
and cannot be revived so as to bring in his successor, although the latter gives his consent. See also United States v. ChandlerSearch
-
United States v. LamontSearch
-
United States v. LochrenSearch
-
be brought against a continuing municipal board, it does not abate by a change of personnel. Thus, in Commissioners v. SellewSearch
-
This was followed by Thompson v. UnitedSearch
-
that the proceeding did not abate by the resignation of the clerk upon the appointment of his successor, citing People v. ChampionSearch
-
John. 61, and People v. CollinsSearch
-
S. 104 of bonds issued in aid of railroads (which objections were subsequently sustained by this Court in Lewis v. PimaSearch
-
as two independent pieces of legislation, or the general, and perhaps the sounder, rule stated in United States v. TynenSearch
-
We think that case is controlling of the one under consideration, notwithstanding the cases of Miners' Bank v. IowaSearch
-
How. 1, 53 U. S. 7 , and Lyons v. WoodsSearch
-
charter by the Legislature of Iowa. The case is totally different from the one under consideration, and that of Lyons v. WoodsSearch
-
passed another act amending the act of 1890, also in immaterial particulars. It seems, however, as stated in Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
Page 186 U. S. 108 This act was held in Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
well as that of 1891, in 1899, terminated their official existence and operated even on pending cases, Insurance Co. v. RitchieSearch
-
August 3, 1894, and Page 186 U. S. 110 June 6, 1896. While we held in the recent case of Shuerman v. ArizonaSearch
-
had obtained no judgment upon the refunding bonds before applying for a writ of mandamus, as was the case in Memphis v. UnitedSearch
-
was saved thereby, even if it be conceded that the Loan Commission had been abolished. In the case of Memphis v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Murphy v. UtterSearch
-
of Utter v. FranklinSearch
-
Lewis v. PimaSearch
-
of The Secretary v. McGarrahanSearch
-
Rel. Bernardin v. ButterworthSearch
-
Thompson v. UnitedSearch
-
People v. ChampionSearch
-
and People v. CollinsSearch
-
of Miners' Bank v. IowaSearch
-
and Lyons v. WoodsSearch
-
of Lyons v. WoodsSearch
-
Insurance Co. v. RitchieSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial