Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Toledo Scale Co. Vs. Computing Scale Co.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 09, 1923

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

29 entries 4 linked 25 unlinked
Show
  1. Kessler Vs. Eldred US Supreme Court · May 01, 1907
  2. Hopkins Vs. Hebard US Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1914
  3. Embry Vs. Palmer US Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1883
  4. Supreme Tribe of Ben-hur Vs. Cauble US Supreme Court · Mar 07, 1921
  5. Toledo Scale Co. v. Computing
    Search
  6. Scale Co. - 261 U.S. 399 (1923) U.S. Supreme Court Toledo Scale Co. v. Computing
    Search
  7. Scale Co., 261 U.S. 399 (1923) Toledo Scale Company v. Computing
    Search
  8. deprives us of jurisdiction to consider the merits of the decree of October, 1921. The case of Hamilton Shoe Co. v. Wolf
    Search
  9. of equitable discretion for the circuit court of appeals to determine whether this was sufficient excuse. Hopkins v. Hebard
    Search
  10. obtained. There has been much discussion as to whether extrinsic fraud is here alleged, and the case of United States v. Throckmorton
    Search
  11. in dealing with the same ultimate facts and reaching a different conclusion. This was beyond its province. Embry v. Palmer
    Search
  12. Telford v. Brinkerhoff
    Search
  13. Marine Ins. Co. v. Hodgson
    Search
  14. and cannot weigh against the application of this sound principle. As Mr. Justice Story remarked in Ocean Insurance Co. v. Fields
    Search
  15. to be protected. The order which the circuit court of appeals directed against them was within its jurisdiction. Pease v. Rathbun-Jones
    Search
  16. have enjoined the Toledo Company from interfering with the execution of its own decree, Merrimack River Savings Bank v. Clay
    Search
  17. or it could direct the district court to do so, as it did, Supreme Tribe of Ben Hur v. Cauble
    Search
  18. to determine whether the filing and maintenance of the bill was in contempt of its jurisdiction, New Orleans v. New
    Search
  19. Swift v. Black
    Search
  20. F. 20, 29, and, finding it to be so, to punish it by a compensatory imposition, Merrimack River Savings Bank v. Clay
    Search
  21. in the discretion of the court whose dignity has been offended, and whose process has been obstructed. New Orleans v. New
    Search
  22. U.S. Supreme Court Toledo Scale Co. v. Computing
    Search
  23. Toledo Scale Company v. Computing
    Search
  24. of Hamilton Shoe Co. v. Wolf
    Search
  25. of United States v. Throckmorton
    Search
  26. Ocean Insurance Co. v. Fields
    Search
  27. Pease v. Rathbun-Jones
    Search
  28. Merrimack River Savings Bank v. Clay
    Search
  29. New Orleans v. New
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial