Citation network
MountaIn Timber Co. Vs. Washington
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 06, 1917
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. 219 (1917) U.S. Supreme Court Mountain Timber Co. v. WashingtonSearch
-
U.S. 219 (1917) Mountain Timber Company v. WashingtonSearch
-
from the standpoint of employees, the act is the same in principle as the act sustained in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
a judgment in favor of the state, 75 Wash. 581, following its previous decision in State ex rel. Davis-Smith Co. v. ClausenSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
and cannot succeed without showing that its constitutional rights as employer are infringed ( Plymouth Coal Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Jeffrey Mfg. Co. v. BlaggSearch
-
raising a constitutional difficulty from the New York Workmen's Compensation Act, sustained in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
has been violated is not a judicial, but a political, question, committed to Congress, and not to the courts. Luther v. BordenSearch
-
Pacific Page 243 U. S. 235 States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. OregonSearch
-
Davis v. OhioSearch
-
invoked. It is conceded that this has no reference to proceedings in the state courts ( Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. BombolisSearch
-
for another, the points raised against it would be answered sufficiently by our opinion in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
federal Constitution depends not upon how it is characterized, but upon its practical operation and effect. Henderson v. MayorSearch
-
Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry. Co. v. TexasSearch
-
Ludwig v. WesternSearch
-
does not require a separate exercise by the states of their powers of regulation and of taxation. Gundling v. ChicagoSearch
-
U. S. 238 its validity, and the burden of proof and argument is upon those who seek to overthrow it. Erie R. Co. v. WilliamsSearch
-
to what matters are of sufficiently general importance to be subjected to state regulation and administration. Lawton v. SteeleSearch
-
U. S. 1 , 128 U. S. 26 . In Barbier v. ConnollySearch
-
It seems to us that the considerations to which we have adverted in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
Stertz v. IndustrialSearch
-
upon the industry. With respect to the scale of compensation, we repeat what we have said in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
railroad, and operating a sawmill with power-driven machinery, or either of them, are nonhazardous. Plymouth Coal Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
injuries in such employments have become frequent and inevitable, and if, as we have held in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
charged against the industry, either directly, as is done in the case of the act sustained in New York Central R. Co. v. WhiteSearch
-
S. 245 proportioned to the special injury attributable to the activities taxed, is not novel. In Noble State Bank v. HaskellSearch
-
special imposition in the nature of an occupation tax upon all banks existing under the laws of the state. In Hendrick v. MarylandSearch
-
U. S. 610 , 235 U. S. 622 , and Kane v. NewSearch
-
are essential, and whose operations over them are peculiarly injurious. And see Charlotte, Columbia & Augusta R. Co. v. GibbesSearch
-
of this character have been sustained by the state courts against attacks based on constitutional grounds. Morey v. BrownSearch
-
Tenney v. LenzSearch
-
Mitchell v. WilliamsSearch
-
Van Horn v. PeopleSearch
-
Longyear v. BuckSearch
-
Cole v. HallSearch
-
Holst v. RoeSearch
-
McGlond v. WomackSearch
-
that a construction will be adopted such as to bring the law into conflict with the federal Constitution. Bachtel v. WilsonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Mountain Timber Co. v. WashingtonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial