Citation network
Lovell Vs. Newman and Son
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 24, 1913
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
-
Lovell v. NewmanSearch
-
Son - 227 U.S. 412 (1913) U.S. Supreme Court Lovell v. NewmanSearch
-
Son, 227 U.S. 412 (1913) Lovell v. NewmanSearch
-
statements in the petition itself, and not upon questions subsequently arising in the progress of the case. Macfadden v. UnitedSearch
-
in the circuit court of appeals depends upon the application of the Circuit Court of Appeals Act to the case. Hewit v. BerlinSearch
-
Knapp v. MilwaukeeSearch
-
Tefft, Weller & Co. v. MunsuriSearch
-
arise in the subsequent progress of the case, but upon the grounds of jurisdiction asserted in the petition. Macfadden v. UnitedSearch
-
settled in favor of such jurisdiction in aid of the original jurisdiction by the decisions of this Court in Babbitt v. DutcherSearch
-
that of the trustee), or there is a cause of action arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States. Bush v. ElliottSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the ground of diverse citizenship is concerned, conforms to the requirement of the Bankruptcy Act as construed in Bush v. ElliottSearch
-
depends. This Court had recent occasion to summarize the principles upon which such jurisdiction rests in Shulthis v. McDougalSearch
-
been brought into the suit by the answers or in the course of the subsequent proceedings. Colorado Central Mining Co. v. TurckSearch
-
Tennessee v. UnionSearch
-
Spencer v. DuplanSearch
-
Devine v. LosSearch
-
in the bill, for jurisdiction cannot rest on any ground that is not affirmatively and distinctly set forth. Hanford v. DaviesSearch
-
Mountain View Mining Co. v. McFaddenSearch
-
Bankers' Casualty Co. v. MinneapolisSearch
-
because the action was brought by an assignee in bankruptcy. Mr. Justice Gray, speaking for the Court, said in Bardes v. HawardenSearch
-
This was also held in Spencer v. DuplanSearch
-
no federal controversy, and the mere fact that plaintiff was trustee in bankruptcy did not give jurisdiction. Bardes v. BankSearch
-
That case has frequently been cited approvingly since. Warder v. LoomisSearch
-
Watkins v. AmericanSearch
-
Mobile Transp. Co. v. MobileSearch
-
Montana Catholic Missions v. MissoulaSearch
-
Empire State-Idaho Mining & Developing Co. v. BunkerSearch
-
Russell v. RussellSearch
-
Warder v. CottonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Lovell v. NewmanSearch
-
Macfadden v. UnitedSearch
-
Hewit v. BerlinSearch
-
of the United States. Bush v. ElliottSearch
-
Colorado Central Mining Co. v. TurckSearch
-
Bardes v. HawardenSearch
-
Bardes v. BankSearch
-
Warder v. LoomisSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial