Citation network
Hooker Vs. Burr
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 16, 1904
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. 415 (1904) U.S. Supreme Court Hooker v. BurrSearch
-
U.S. 415 (1904) Hooker v. BurrSearch
-
even though the law complained of was passed after the execution of the mortgage which was foreclosed. Insurance Co. v. CushmanSearch
-
U. S. 51 , followed, and Barnitz v. BeverlySearch
-
must show that he may be injured by the unconstitutional law before the courts will listen to his complaint. Tyler v. JudgesSearch
-
the question becomes a moot one, and courts do not sit to decide that character of question. American Book Company v. KansasSearch
-
to be determined as we have stated. It has been so decided in the case of Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. CushmanSearch
-
of that case decides the one at bar. It is asserted, however, on the part of the plaintiff in error, that Barnitz v. BeverlySearch
-
to a reversal of the judgment. We are not of that opinion. In the first place, it was distinctly stated in Barnitz v. BeverlySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
The leading ease on the subject of redemption decides nothing as to the rights of a purchaser. It is that of Bronson v. KinzieSearch
-
without reference to the law passed subsequently to the time of the execution of the mortgage contract. McCracken v. HaywardSearch
-
be granted, because the subsequent legislation impaired his contract as mortgagee with the mortgagor. In Gantly v. EwingSearch
-
was made before the sale. The case was decided, as the opinion shows, entirely upon the authority of Bronson v. KinzieSearch
-
impaired by the subsequent law if the court should permit it to be enforced. The question again arose in Howard v. BugbeeSearch
-
How. 461, and that case was also decided upon the authority of Bronson v. KinzieSearch
-
that the act of the legislature was invalid as an impairment of the mortgage contract, upon the authority of Bronson v. KinzieSearch
-
and this question, we think, has been clearly determined against the purchaser in the case of Insurance Company v. CushmanSearch
-
the decision in that case, which we think was correct and stands upon a firm foundation. The later case of Barnitz v. BeverlySearch
-
If a sale be made under a decree directing that it be without regard to the subsequent legislation, as in Bronson v. KinzieSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Hooker v. BurrSearch
-
Insurance Co. v. CushmanSearch
-
and Barnitz v. BeverlySearch
-
Tyler v. JudgesSearch
-
American Book Company v. KansasSearch
-
of Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. CushmanSearch
-
of Bronson v. KinzieSearch
-
In Gantly v. EwingSearch
-
of Insurance Company v. CushmanSearch
-
of Barnitz v. BeverlySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial