Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Calhoun Vs. Massie

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 17, 1920

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

57 entries 4 linked 53 unlinked
Show
  1. Ball Vs. Halsell US Supreme Court · Mar 02, 1896
  2. Capital Trust Co. Vs. Calhoun US Supreme Court · Jun 02, 1919
  3. Coppage Vs. Kansas US Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1915
  4. Adams Vs. Tanner US Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1917
  5. U.S. 170 (1920) U.S. Supreme Court Calhoun v. Massie
    Search
  6. U.S. 170 (1920) Calhoun v. Massie
    Search
  7. extortion or improvident bargains and in part to protect the treasury from frauds and imposition. See United States v. Van
    Search
  8. the opportunity Page 253 U. S. 174 of securing such services if contingent fees were prohibited, Taylor v. Bemiss
    Search
  9. legislation, although resembling in its nature the exercise of the police power, has long been settled. Marshall v. Baltimore
    Search
  10. United Page 253 U. S. 175 States v. Hall
    Search
  11. of the Revised Statutes. Nutt v. Knut
    Search
  12. the government is valid also as to contracts which had been entered into before its passage was expressly held in Ball v. Halsell
    Search
  13. Hipolite Egg Co. v. United
    Search
  14. Hoke v. United
    Search
  15. Hamilton v. Kentucky
    Search
  16. the government is not less because the property affected happens to be a contract. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley
    Search
  17. Union Dry Goods Co. v. Georgia
    Search
  18. Public Service Corporation, 248 U. S. 372 . Here, unlike New York Central v. Gray
    Search
  19. if it concluded to grant relief, Congress was free to do so upon such conditions as it deemed proper. Compare Ball v. Halsell
    Search
  20. Kendall v. United
    Search
  21. Calhoun cannot take under the act and repudiate its provisions. Compare Shepard v. Barron
    Search
  22. Grand Rapids & Indiana Ry. Co. v. Osborn
    Search
  23. Interstate Railway Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  24. according to the terms of the act. Any reservation which he may have made in words was futile. Capital Trust Co. v. Calhoun
    Search
  25. latter's claim against the United States Page 253 U. S. 178 for property taken during the Civil War ( Taylor v. Bemiss
    Search
  26. from the United States, but from other assets of the estate, a situation is presented which it was said in Nutt v. Knut
    Search
  27. the definite statement concerning the true meaning of this section made twelve months ago in Capital Trust Co. v. Calhoun
    Search
  28. both by lawyers and courts. The result is necessarily injurious both to the court and the public. In United States v. Delaware
    Search
  29. performed, and renders criminal the acceptance by him of more than an arbitrarily specified amount. Marshall v. Baltimore
    Search
  30. Ohio R. Co., 16 How. 314, 57 U. S. 316 , United States v. Hall
    Search
  31. U. S. 343 , 98 U. S. 354 -355, and Ball v. Halsell
    Search
  32. U. S. 84 , are referred to as authority for such oppressive legislation. They give it no support. Marshall v. Baltimore
    Search
  33. in case the law should pass. The case appears unimportant in connection with this controversy. In United States v. Hall
    Search
  34. but he is not. In Ball v. Halsell
    Search
  35. is wholly unlike the one now before us. Mr. Justice Gray took pains to explain the difference between it and Davis v. Commonwealth
    Search
  36. claim provided that no part of such sum should be paid by the state to any attorney under previous contract. Davis v. Commonwealth
    Search
  37. and the language by Mr. Justice Gray in Ball v. Halsell
    Search
  38. set at twenty percent, any payment may Page 253 U. S. 182 be proscribed. We should follow Capital Trust Co. v. Calhoun
    Search
  39. law, and this inhibition protects every man in his right to engage in honest and useful work for compensation. Adair v. United
    Search
  40. U.S. Supreme Court Calhoun v. Massie
    Search
  41. See United States v. Van
    Search
  42. Taylor v. Bemiss
    Search
  43. Marshall v. Baltimore
    Search
  44. States v. Hall
    Search
  45. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley
    Search
  46. New York Central v. Gray
    Search
  47. Compare Ball v. Halsell
    Search
  48. Compare Shepard v. Barron
    Search
  49. In United States v. Delaware
    Search
  50. United States v. Hall
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial