Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Rice

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 22, 1946

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

32 entries 3 linked 29 unlinked
Show
  1. Employers Reinsurance Corp. Vs. Bryant US Supreme Court · Jan 04, 1937
  2. United States Vs. Herron US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1873
  3. Gay Vs. Ruff US Supreme Court · Apr 02, 1934
    Relied / Followed
  4. U.S. 742 (1946) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Rice
    Search
  5. U.S. 742 (1946) United States v. Rice
    Search
  6. of remand was deemed to be not reviewable by appeal or writ of error, because the order was not final. Railroad Co. v. Wiswall
    Search
  7. extent the Government may be excluded from the operation of a statute in which it is not named, cf. United States v. Stevenson
    Search
  8. U. S. 190 , 215 U. S. 197 , with United States v. California
    Search
  9. were not appealable, Page 327 U. S. 750 because nonfinal, they might be reviewed by mandamus. Railroad Co. v. Wiswall
    Search
  10. that is, in all cases removed from state courts under any statute authorizing removal. See Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. Bryant
    Search
  11. cannot be reviewed by mandamus. Ex parte Pennsylvania Co., supra, Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. Bryant
    Search
  12. begun in state courts, is as pertinent to those removed by the United States as by any other suitor, see United States v. California
    Search
  13. removed under the Act of 1887, but to orders of remand made in cases removed under any other statutes as well. Cole v. Garland
    Search
  14. F. 759, dismissed on appeal, 183 U.S. 693, approved in Gay v. Ruff
    Search
  15. Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. Bryant
    Search
  16. supra, 299 U. S. 380 -381. It was so held with respect to the Act of 1926 in United States v. Fixico
    Search
  17. not to create doubts, but to resolve them when the real issue or statutory purpose is otherwise obscure. United States v. California
    Search
  18. The United States has a special function to perform in these Indian cases. It represents the public interest. Heckman v. United
    Search
  19. United States v. American
    Search
  20. Dollar Savings Bank v. United
    Search
  21. there is no such prohibition, mandamus is available to compel the District Court to preform its duty. Railroad Co. v. Wiswall
    Search
  22. institute an independent suit and annul the prior decree entered in the suit to which it was not a party. Sunderland v. United
    Search
  23. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Rice
    Search
  24. Railroad Co. v. Wiswall
    Search
  25. United States v. California
    Search
  26. See Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. Bryant
    Search
  27. Cole v. Garland
    Search
  28. United States v. Fixico
    Search
  29. Heckman v. United
    Search
  30. Sunderland v. United
    Search
  31. Stanley v. Schwalby
    Search
  32. United States v. Stevenson
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial