Citation network
Ex Parte Republic of Peru
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 05, 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
-
can be constitutionally exercised only insofar as such writs are in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. Marbury v. MadisonSearch
-
United States v. DernSearch
-
of the Judicial Code to issue the writ. McClellan v. CarlandSearch
-
Adams v. U.SSearch
-
those grounds are at least as strong and urgent as those found sufficient in Ex parte United States, in Maryland v. SoperSearch
-
in Colorado v. SymesSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
and in McCullough v. CosgraveSearch
-
Berizzi Bros. Co. v. TheSearch
-
United States v. LeeSearch
-
McCullough v. CosgraveSearch
-
Los Angeles Brush Corp. v. JamesSearch
-
See particularly the discussion in Maryland v. SoperSearch
-
cl. 2. United States v. TexasSearch
-
been the occasion for an opinion dealing with questions of public importance. See, e.g., Los Angeles Brush Corp. v. JamesSearch
-
Mooney v. HolohanSearch
-
American Construction Co. v. JacksonvilleSearch
-
jurisdiction was in issue, directly to this Court, without going to the Circuit Court of Appeals. See, e.g., Wilson v. RepublicSearch
-
file petition for writ of mandamus granted after such leave was denied by the Circuit Court of Appeals), and Adams v. U.SSearch
-
despite its deft authorship, soon revealed such ambiguities. See the series of cases collected in Phillips v. UnitedSearch
-
in a variety of situations, even though Congress did not adequately express such purpose. See, for instance, McLish v. RoffSearch
-
America Sugar Refining Co. v. NewSearch
-
American Security Co. v. DistrictSearch
-
Inter-Island Steam Navigation Co. v. WardSearch
-
which no redress could be had in any other court. Therefore, the considerations which led this Court in United States v. TexasSearch
-
legislation. Of the same nature were four other cases, three suits by Maryland and one by Colorado. Maryland v. SoperSearch
-
claims by a state against one of its citizens for which the state courts are the appropriate tribunals, see California v. SouthernSearch
-
this Court under Article III, Section 2. It is not without significance Page 318 U. S. 599 that the Maryland v. SoperSearch
-
cases and Colorado v. SymesSearch
-
were not even referred to in the opinion in the latter case. If Ex parte United States, the Maryland v. SoperSearch
-
occur when technical questions of the Court and consciously met. That leaves two other cases, Los Angeles Brush Corp. v. JamesSearch
-
U. S. 701 , and McCullough v. CosgraveSearch
-
had qualified In re Massachusetts and In re Glaser, supra. But the cases that were avouched ( McClellan v. CarlandSearch
-
of In re Massachusetts, supra, and In re Glaser, supra, was unquestioned as late as 1923, in Magnum Co. v. CotySearch
-
under such circumstances as precedents when the question is first sharply brought for decision. United States v. MoreSearch
-
Snow v. UnitedSearch
-
Los Angeles Brush Corp. v. JamesSearch
-
United States v. TexasSearch
-
Wilson v. RepublicSearch
-
the Circuit Court of Appeals), and Adams v. U.SSearch
-
Phillips v. UnitedSearch
-
Colorado. Maryland v. SoperSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial