Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Sinclair Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 08, 1929

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

40 entries 3 linked 37 unlinked
Show
  1. McgraIn Vs. Daugherty US Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1927
  2. United States Vs. Louisville US Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1898
  3. interstate Commerce Commission Vs. Brimson US Supreme Court · May 26, 1894
  4. Sinclair v. United
    Search
  5. States - 279 U.S. 263 (1929) U.S. Supreme Court Sinclair v. United
    Search
  6. States, 279 U.S. 263 (1929) Sinclair v. United
    Search
  7. bounds of the power are exceeded or where the questions asked are not pertinent to the matter under inquiry. McGrain v. Daugherty
    Search
  8. supplemental contract was made by which the company agreed to furnish storage facilities for the Navy. Mammoth Oil Co. v. United
    Search
  9. Petroleum Company purporting to grant to it the right to take oil and gas from Reserve No. 1. Pan American Co. v. United
    Search
  10. as a witness without being summoned, as well as to the case of one required to attend. By our opinion in McGrain v. Daugherty
    Search
  11. the purpose of the courts well to uphold the right of privacy, we quote from some of their decisions. In Kilbourn v. Thompson
    Search
  12. And the learned Justice, referring to Kilbourn v. Thompson
    Search
  13. Judge Sawyer, p. 259 at 263, and of District Judge Sabin, p. 268 at p. 269. In Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson
    Search
  14. can be invested with a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen. . . . We said in Boyd v. United
    Search
  15. Harriman v. Interstate
    Search
  16. Act of Congress to authorize any examination of witnesses in respect of their personal affairs. And see United States v. Louisville
    Search
  17. Nashville R. Co., 236 U. S. 318 , 236 U. S. 335 . In Federal Trade Commission v. American
    Search
  18. authorize one of its subordinate agencies to sweep all our traditions into the fire ( Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson
    Search
  19. The context and circumstances show that Resolution 294 was intended to be kept in force. See School District No. 11 v. Chapman
    Search
  20. proprietor, and was authorized to deal with it as a private individual may deal with lands owned by him. United States v. Midwest
    Search
  21. And the materiality of what is falsely sworn, when an element in the crime of perjury, is one for the court. Carroll v. United
    Search
  22. United States v. Singleton
    Search
  23. Cothran v. State
    Search
  24. to well established principles to leave the determination of such a matter to a jury. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson
    Search
  25. Horning v. District
    Search
  26. answer. He was bound rightly to construe the statute. His mistaken view of the law is no defense. Armour Packing Co. v. United
    Search
  27. Standard Sanitary Mfg. Co. v. United
    Search
  28. authorized as punishment for the offense charged in the first count, we need not consider any other count. Abrams v. United
    Search
  29. U.S. Supreme Court Sinclair v. United
    Search
  30. the Navy. Mammoth Oil Co. v. United
    Search
  31. Pan American Co. v. United
    Search
  32. In Kilbourn v. Thompson
    Search
  33. Kilbourn v. Thompson
    Search
  34. In Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson
    Search
  35. Boyd v. United
    Search
  36. In Federal Trade Commission v. American
    Search
  37. United States v. Midwest
    Search
  38. Carroll v. United
    Search
  39. Armour Packing Co. v. United
    Search
  40. Abrams v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial