Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Meredith Vs. Winter Haven

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Nov 08, 1943

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

68 entries 7 linked 61 unlinked
Show
  1. Fidelity Union Trust Co. Vs. Field US Supreme Court · Dec 09, 1940
  2. Mcclellan Vs. Carland US Supreme Court · Apr 11, 1910
  3. Gordon Vs. Ominsky US Supreme Court · Feb 04, 1935
  4. Gordon Vs. Washington US Supreme Court · Apr 01, 1935
  5. Commonwealth Trust Co. Vs. Bradford US Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1936
  6. Matthews Vs. Rodgers US Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1932
  7. Cavanaugh Vs. Looney US Supreme Court · Jan 13, 1919
  8. Meredith v. Winter
    Search
  9. Haven - 320 U.S. 228 (1943) U.S. Supreme Court Meredith v. Winter
    Search
  10. Haven, 320 U.S. 228 (1943) Meredith v. Winter
    Search
  11. that the applicable law of Florida was not clearly settled and stable, but was quite the contrary, citing Sullivan v. City
    Search
  12. Commissioners of Columbia County v. King
    Search
  13. Nuveen v. Greer
    Search
  14. Humphreys v. State
    Search
  15. Alta-Cliff Co. v. Spurway
    Search
  16. Lee v. Bond-Howell
    Search
  17. Lumber Co., 123 Fla. 202, 166 So. 733, and Andrews v. City
    Search
  18. of state law, the case does not differ from an ordinary equity suit in which, both before and since Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins
    Search
  19. Outman v. Cone
    Search
  20. Outman v. Page
    Search
  21. Taylor v. Williams
    Search
  22. Andrews v. City
    Search
  23. amended bill of complaint, after the present suit was begun, the Supreme Court of Florida decided the case of Andrews v. City
    Search
  24. It is the contention of petitioners that the Andrews case is not controlling, because it, as well as Outman v. Cone
    Search
  25. supra, and Taylor v. Williams
    Search
  26. with earlier decisions of the Supreme Court of Florida antedating the Refunding Bonds of 1933, particularly Sullivan v. City
    Search
  27. State v. City
    Search
  28. State v. Special
    Search
  29. Bay County v. State
    Search
  30. State v. Citrus
    Search
  31. State v. Sarasota
    Search
  32. Court of Florida was not directed to the doctrine which it had earlier announced in Commissioners of Columbia County v. King
    Search
  33. supra, and in State ex rel. Nuveen v. Greer
    Search
  34. be said with some assurance that the Florida Supreme Court will not follow them in the future, see Wichita Royalty Co. v. City
    Search
  35. West v. American
    Search
  36. invoked, to decide questions of state law whenever necessary to the rendition of a judgment. Commonwealth Trust Co. v. Bradford
    Search
  37. Risty v. Chicago
    Search
  38. Kline v. Burke
    Search
  39. federal district courts is an appeal to the sound discretion which guides the determinations of courts of equity. Beal v. Missouri
    Search
  40. powers may require them to withhold their relief in furtherance of a recognized defined public policy. Di Giovanni v. Camden
    Search
  41. to interfere with state criminal prosecutions except when moved by most urgent considerations, Spielman Motor Co. v. Dodge
    Search
  42. Beal v. Missouri
    Search
  43. Douglas v. City
    Search
  44. or with the collection of state taxes or with the fiscal affairs of the state, Matthews v. Rodgers
    Search
  45. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Huffman
    Search
  46. the state administrative function of prescribing the local rates of public utilities, Central Kentucky Natural Gas Co. v. Railroad
    Search
  47. there is no contention that the interests of creditors and stockholders will not be adequately protected, Pennsylvania v. Williams
    Search
  48. Kelleam v. Maryland
    Search
  49. refuse to appraise or shape domestic policy of the state governing its administrative agencies. Railroad Commission v. Rowan
    Search
  50. Burford v. Sun
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial