Citation network
Clark Vs. Paul Gray, Inc.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 17, 1939
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
-
Clark v. PaulSearch
-
Gray, Inc. - 306 U.S. 583 (1939) U.S. Supreme Court Clark v. PaulSearch
-
Gray, Inc., 306 U.S. 583 (1939) Clark v. PaulSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
caravans or convoys composed largely of cars coupled in twos, each pair in control of a single driver. Cf. Morf v. BingamanSearch
-
California, from enforcing the license and fee provisions of Chapter 788, p. 2253, California Statutes of 1937. Gray v. IngelsSearch
-
Act, was enacted as a substitute for the Caravan Act of 1935, c. 402, p. 1453, Cal.Stat. 1935, held invalid in Ingels v. MorfSearch
-
we raised the question whether the jurisdictional amount was involved, as was our duty. Mansfield, C. & L. Ry. Co. v. SwanSearch
-
St. Paul Indemnity Co. v. RedSearch
-
by the challenged fees. No joint or common interest of appellees in the subject matter of the suit is shown. Cf. Gibbs v. BuckSearch
-
Rogers v. HennepinSearch
-
the jurisdictional amount, and are insufficient to show that the district court had jurisdiction of the cause. Pinel v. PinelSearch
-
taxes is the amount of the fees or taxes which would normally be collected during the period of the litigation, Healy v. RattaSearch
-
under statutes prescribing that a specified amount in controversy is prerequisite to the appeal, Williamson v. KincaidSearch
-
Roura v. PhilippineSearch
-
Red River Cattle Co. v. NeedhamSearch
-
action of the district court in assuming jurisdiction is confined to the record before the district court. Henneford v. NorthernSearch
-
to dismiss the suit for want of the jurisdictional amount as to all appellees except Paul Gray, Inc. See Rich v. LambertSearch
-
U. S. 598 . Cf. Grosjean v. AmericanSearch
-
caravans and those similarly driven wholly within either of the state zones, for which no fee is charged. In Morf v. BingamanSearch
-
applied to other types of motor car movement. Without repeating what was said more at length of like traffic in Morf v. BingamanSearch
-
authority to exact reasonable fees for the use of their highways by vehicles moving interstate, Hendrick v. MarylandSearch
-
Kane v. NewSearch
-
Sprout v. SouthSearch
-
Dixie Ohio Express Co. v. StateSearch
-
charge for the use a fee not shown to be unreasonable or excessive. Page 306 U. S. 594 Continental Baking Co. v. WoodringSearch
-
because the weight of the evidence in court appears to favor a different standard. Cf. Worcester County Trust Co. v. RileySearch
-
be supported by facts known to it, unless facts judicially known or proved preclude that possibility. Standard Oil Co. v. MarysvilleSearch
-
Borden's Farm Products Co. v. TenSearch
-
South Carolina Highway Dept. v. BarnwellSearch
-
United States v. CaroleneSearch
-
to make, is applied to vehicles using the state highways in interstate commerce. South Carolina Highway Department v. BarnwellSearch
-
to have acted on information available to courts, and where, as here, the evidence, like that discussed in Morf v. BingamanSearch
-
hazards requiring special police control, decision is for the legislature, and not the courts. Standard Oil Co. v. MarysvilleSearch
-
South Carolina Highway Department v. BarnwellSearch
-
that this appellee transports any cars singly. From what has been said, it is evident, as was decided in Morf v. BingamanSearch
-
it might have been more aptly defined, or that the statute may tax others who are not within the class. See Patsone v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
free to set aside its determination unless they can say that it is without any substantial basis. Carley & Hamilton v. SnookSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Clark v. PaulSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial