Citation network
Toomer Vs. Witsell
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 07, 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
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 385 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Toomer v. WitsellSearch
-
U.S. 385 (1948) Toomer v. WitsellSearch
-
the marginal sea, like other common callings, is within the purview of the privileges and immunities clause. McCready v. VirginiaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of the Constitution. Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
South Carolina has no jurisdiction over coastal waters beyond the low-water mark. In the court below, United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
paramount rights in the three-mile belt, the Court pointedly quoted and supplied emphasis to a statement in Skiriotes v. FloridaSearch
-
But in only one case, McCready v. VirginiaSearch
-
for the South Carolina statute. That the shrimp are migratory makes apposite Mr. Justice Holmes' statement in Missouri v. HollandSearch
-
regulates is of equal relevance in considering the applicability of the ownership doctrine. While United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
such as those here at issue, on out-of-state shipments. There is considerable authority, starting with Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
not at the same time condition such shipments so as to burden interstate commerce. In Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. HaydelSearch
-
In Johnson v. HaydelSearch
-
Appellees stress American Federation of Labor v. WatsonSearch
-
may institute suit to recover the amounts paid within thirty days of the payment under protest. See Argent Lumber Co. v. QuerySearch
-
See American Federation of Labor v. WatsonSearch
-
Rescue Army v. MunicipalSearch
-
See Hope Natural Gas Co. v. HallSearch
-
Lacoste v. DeptSearch
-
Heisler v. ThomasSearch
-
See Paul v. VirginiaSearch
-
Travis v. YaleSearch
-
Chalker v. BirminghamSearch
-
See Travis v. YaleSearch
-
See Blake v. McClungSearch
-
Chalker v. BirminghamSearch
-
The most extended exposition appears in the majority opinion in Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
Appellees rely also upon Patsone v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U. S. 138 , and Haavik v. AlaskaSearch
-
Fountain Packing Co. and Johnson cases had been rendered inapplicable to this case by Bayside Fish Flour Co. v. GentrySearch
-
regarding the power of States over its fisheries, and it is this common understanding that was reflected in McCready v. VirginiaSearch
-
intervention is subordinate to the Commerce Clause. That is the nub of the decision in Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. HaydelSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Toomer v. WitsellSearch
-
McCready v. VirginiaSearch
-
United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Skiriotes v. FloridaSearch
-
Missouri v. HollandSearch
-
While United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
In Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. HaydelSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial