Citation network
Shapiro Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 21, 1948
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
-
Shapiro v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 335 U.S. 1 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Shapiro v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 335 U.S. 1 (1948) Shapiro v. UnitedSearch
-
c) In view of the previous construction given to the Compulsory Testimony Act of 1893 by this Court in Heike v. UnitedSearch
-
and since he could assert no valid privilege as to the required records here involved, under the doctrine of Wilson v. UnitedSearch
-
to be an adequate substitute for the constitutional privilege, in response to the ruling by this Court in Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
and was affirmed on appeal, 159 F.2d 890. A contrary conclusion was reached by the district judge in United States v. HoffmanSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
by this Court in spelling out the nonprivileged status of records validly required by law to be kept, in Wilson v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 361 (1911), and the inapplicability of immunity provisions to nonprivileged documents, in Heike v. UnitedSearch
-
the opinion of the Court, based the decision on the reasoning (which this Court recently cited with approval in Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
constitutional privilege, since previous statutory provision for immunity had been found by the Court in Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
and legislative history considered above, but by reference to the principle expounded in Federal Trade Commission v. AmericanSearch
-
Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. See opinion of Justice Holmes in Federal Trade Commission v. AmericanSearch
-
White v. WinchesterSearch
-
Club, 315 U. S. 32 (1942). See also United States v. AmericanSearch
-
Committee proceedings merits the same presumption of regularity as the record of a county criminal court. Cf. Foster v. IllinoisSearch
-
Missouri v. RossSearch
-
See digest of brief for appellant in Wilson v. UnitedSearch
-
Wilson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 221 U. S. 361 , 221 U. S. 380 (1911). Holmes, J., in Heike v. UnitedSearch
-
Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. ICCSearch
-
treat as nonprivileged records required by statute to be kept by such individuals as licensed fish dealers, Paladini v. SuperiorSearch
-
junk dealers regulated by municipal ordinance, St. Louis v. BaskowitzSearch
-
Mo. 543, 201 S.W. 870 (1918), or by statute, State v. LegoraSearch
-
Rosenthal v. NewSearch
-
dealers in raw furs, State v. SteinSearch
-
and licensed money lenders, Financial Aid Corp. v. WallaceSearch
-
earlier provisos in 8 Wigmore, Evidence, 511 n. 9 (3d ed.1940), and in the brief submitted by the Government in Heike v. UnitedSearch
-
as the majority of the Court in United States v. MoniaSearch
-
See Judge Delehant's well reasoned discussion, in Bowles v. MisleSearch
-
Compare the dictum in United States v. MulliganSearch
-
treat the records as public in the sense that they be open at all times to scrutiny by the merely curious. See Coleman v. UnitedSearch
-
Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
United States v. AmericanSearch
-
Missouri, Pacific R. Co. v. BooneSearch
-
Cf. Yakus v. UnitedSearch
-
Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 328 U. S. 582 , 328 U. S. 589 -590 (1946). See also United States v. DarbySearch
-
Arrow Distilleries v. AlexanderSearch
-
Di Santo v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 93 F.2d 948 (1937). Cf. Rodgers v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 138 F.2d 992, 995, 996 (1943). In Boyd v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial