Citation network
Ahrens Vs. Clark
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
-
U.S. 188 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Ahrens v. ClarkSearch
-
U.S. 188 (1948) Ahrens v. ClarkSearch
-
frequently arisen in the lower federal courts. But the general view is that their jurisdiction is so confined. McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
United States v. DaySearch
-
Jones v. BiddleSearch
-
United States v. SchlotfeldtSearch
-
Cf. Sanders v. AllenSearch
-
Tippitt v. WoodSearch
-
from specific exceptions created by Congress, the jurisdiction of the district courts is territorial. See Georgia v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
See Walker v. JohnstonSearch
-
has placed on the power of the District Court to act. Hence, it may not be waived by the parties. United States v. GriffinSearch
-
Sanders v. BennettSearch
-
important questions upon which these petitioners are as much entitled to hearing and decision as Ludecke. Cf. Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
even assiduously, out of regard for the writ's great office in the vindication of personal liberty. See, e.g., Bowen v. JohnstonSearch
-
from the accepted premise that, for this purpose, the jurisdiction of the district court is territorial, see Georgia v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
the section's otherwise unlimited phrasing from authorizing process to run without territorial limitation, cf. Georgia v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
for them to compel the petitioner's production in such an inconvenient or otherwise inappropriate forum. See Beard v. BennettSearch
-
establishing jurisdiction in any court in the land. Such a situation might arise from military detention, cf. Duncan v. KahanamokuSearch
-
in time of emergency with consequent disruption of the means of keeping personal records in order, cf. Hirabayashi v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Sunal v. LargeSearch
-
of the writ to be made outside the limits of the state in which the court sits, see United States ex rel. Corsetti v. CommandingSearch
-
whether service on the turnkey would constitute service on the custodian. See United States ex rel. Goodman v. RobertsSearch
-
here. I think the case presented by the petition is one in which we can give belief, and the decision in United States v. DavisSearch
-
Emphasis added.) 15 Mich. at 441. Some of the cases following this view are Emerson v. GuthnerSearch
-
Crowell v. CrowellSearch
-
Shaw v. ShawSearch
-
Queen v. BarnardoSearch
-
United States v. DavisSearch
-
McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
Sanders v. AllenSearch
-
App.D.C. 307, 100 F.2d 717. See Tippitt v. WoodSearch
-
Burns v. WelchSearch
-
Of the cases cited in note 17, only McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
and In re Bickley are in accord with today's decision. And even those two cases are distinguishable. In McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
District by inmates of those institutions even though they are confined beyond its territorial jurisdiction. Sanders v. AllenSearch
-
App.D.C. 307, 100 F.2d 717. See Burns v. WelchSearch
-
that the Court of Appeals reached this result in the face of the apparently inconsistent earlier holding in McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
the court had jurisdiction, it properly declined to exercise it because relief was available elsewhere, see Sanders v. AllenSearch
-
or, at least by implication, on the ground that Secretary Moody was not a proper party respondent. See Sanders v. BennettSearch
-
App.D.C. 32, 148 F.2d 19, 20, n. 2. Both of these grounds indicate that the Court of Appeals no longer regards McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
of this reservation with the decision is highlighted by the citation, apparently with approval, of McGowan v. MoodySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Ahrens v. ClarkSearch
-
See Georgia v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Ludecke. Cf. Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial