Citation network
United States Vs. Pink
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 02, 1942
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. 203 (1942) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. PinkSearch
-
U.S. 203 (1942) United States v. PinkSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
under New York practice, of grounding a motion for summary judgment in this case on the record in Moscow Fire Ins. Co. v. BankSearch
-
District of New York, seeking to recover the assets in the hands of respondent. This Court held, in United States v. BankSearch
-
The answer was filed in March, 1938. In April, 1939, the New York Court of Appeals decided Moscow Fire Ins. Co. v. BancSearch
-
granted. The Moscow case is not res judicata, since respondent was not a party to that suit. Stone v. Farmers'Search
-
Rudd v. CornellSearch
-
St. John v. FowlerSearch
-
authoritative precedent. While it was conclusive and binding upon the parties as respects that controversy ( Durant v. EssexSearch
-
Court on the principles of law involved prevents it from being an authoritative determination for other cases. Hertz v. WoodmanSearch
-
why we cannot take judicial notice of the record in this Court of the Moscow case. Bienville Water Supply Co. v. MobileSearch
-
For the United States acquired, under the Litvinov Assignment, only such rights as Russia had. Guaranty Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
state court. The claim of the United States based on the Litvinov Assignment raises a federal question. United States v. BelmontSearch
-
review or independently determine all questions on which a federal right is necessarily dependent. United States v. AnsoniaSearch
-
Ancient Egyptian Order v. MichauxSearch
-
Broad River Power Co. v. SouthSearch
-
on a correct interpretation of Russian law. As in cases arising under the full faith and credit clause ( Huntington v. AttrillSearch
-
U. S. 221 given), though procedural considerations require it to be presented as a question of fact. Fitzpatrick v. InternationalSearch
-
Petroradsky M. K. Bank v. NationalSearch
-
foreign law even though they are rendered subsequently to the trial. Los Angeles Investment Securities Corp. v. JoslynSearch
-
p. 312). It is one thing to hold, as was done in Guaranty Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
in New York of the Russian decrees on which the assigned claims rest. That power was denied New York in United States v. BelmontSearch
-
the purpose of the compact to eliminate all possible sources of friction between these two great nations. See Tucker v. AlexandroffSearch
-
the State ( Matter of People, 242 N.Y. 148, 15159, 151 N.E. 159) should be recognized within the rule of Clark v. WilliardSearch
-
S. 211 , or should yield to the Federal policy expressed in the international compact or agreement. Santovincenzo v. EganSearch
-
To be sure, aliens as well as citizens are entitled to the protection of the Fifth Amendment. Russian Volunteer Fleet v. UnitedSearch
-
as against creditors who are nationals of foreign countries and whose claims arose abroad. Disconto Gesellschaft v. UmbreitSearch
-
had been accorded American claims by treaty with Russia, there would be no doubt as to its validity. Cf. Santovincenzo v. EganSearch
-
Guaranty Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
to recognition, are to be addressed to the political department, and not to the courts. See Guaranty Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Monaco v. MississippiSearch
-
United States v. Curtiss-WrightSearch
-
Such international compacts and agreements as the Litvinov Assignment have a similar dignity. United States v. BelmontSearch
-
of the States of this nation unless clearly necessary to effectuate the national policy. Guaranty Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
States, supra, p. 304 U. S. 143 and cases cited. For example, in Todok v. UnionSearch
-
law governing such dispositions. Frequently, the obligation of a treaty will be dependent on state law. Prevost v. GreneauxSearch
-
with, or impairs the policy or provisions of, a treaty or of an international compact or agreement. See Nielsen v. JohnsonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial