Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Hull Vs. Burr

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 22, 1914

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

53 entries 17 linked 36 unlinked
Show
  1. Defiance Water Co. Vs. Defiance US Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1903
  2. Arbuckle Vs. Blackburn US Supreme Court · Dec 07, 1903
  3. Shulthis Vs. Mcdougal US Supreme Court · Jun 07, 1912
  4. Buck Vs. Colbath US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1865
  5. Krippendorf Vs. Hyde US Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1884
  6. Lammon Vs. Feusier US Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1884
  7. Covell Vs. Heyman US Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1884
  8. Root Vs. Woolworth US Supreme Court · Nov 27, 1893
  9. Moran Vs. Sturges US Supreme Court · May 26, 1894
  10. White Vs. Ewing US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1895
  11. Peck Vs. Jenness US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1849
  12. Watson Vs. Jones US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1871
  13. Haines Vs. Carpenter US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1875
  14. Dial Vs. Reynolds US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1877
  15. Chapman Vs. Brewer US Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1885
  16. Marshall Vs. Holmes US Supreme Court · Nov 09, 1891
  17. Hanford Vs. Davies US Supreme Court · May 18, 1896
  18. U.S. 712 (1914) U.S. Supreme Court Hull v. Burr
    Search
  19. U.S. 712 (1914) Hull v. Burr
    Search
  20. attacked, and could be assailed only by a direct proceeding in a competent court, citing New Lamp Chimney Co. v. Ansonia
    Search
  21. Graham v. Boston
    Search
  22. the authority of the court first acquiring jurisdiction, the parties being the same, must prevail, citing Marshall v. Holmes
    Search
  23. U. S. 589 , 141 U. S. 596 , and Central National Bank v. Stevens
    Search
  24. matter of mere inference or argument, but clearly and distinctly, that the suit arises under some federal law. Hanford v. Davies
    Search
  25. Mountain View Mining & Milling Co. v. McFadden
    Search
  26. Bankers Casualty Co. v. Minneapolis
    Search
  27. that reason maintainable in the district court as a suit arising under the laws of the United States, See Freeman v. Howe
    Search
  28. Minnesota Co. v. Milwaukee
    Search
  29. Dewey v. West
    Search
  30. Morgans' Co. v. Texas
    Search
  31. Byers v. McAuley
    Search
  32. Carey v. Houston
    Search
  33. Pope v. Louisville
    Search
  34. Wabash Railroad v. Adelbert
    Search
  35. Stat. 335), and has been constantly observed by the courts. See Diggs v. Wolcott
    Search
  36. United States v. Parkhurst-Davis
    Search
  37. Hunt v. New
    Search
  38. Prentis v. Atlantic
    Search
  39. proceedings in a state court which would have the effect of defeating or impairing such jurisdiction. French v. Hay
    Search
  40. Deitzsch v. Huidekoper
    Search
  41. Julian v. Central
    Search
  42. have been made parties. To this point, a decision of the Florida supreme court in the very action is cited ( Hull v. Burr
    Search
  43. the court first obtaining jurisdiction of a controversy should be permitted to proceed without interference. Peck v. Jenness
    Search
  44. Central Nat. Bank v. Stevens
    Search
  45. Bigelow v. Old
    Search
  46. U.S. Supreme Court Hull v. Burr
    Search
  47. New Lamp Chimney Co. v. Ansonia
    Search
  48. and Central National Bank v. Stevens
    Search
  49. of the United States, See Freeman v. Howe
    Search
  50. See Diggs v. Wolcott
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial