Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Hughes Vs. Fetter

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 04, 1951

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

64 entries 5 linked 59 unlinked
Show
  1. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. Vs. Yates US Supreme Court · Dec 07, 1936
  2. Converse Vs. Hamilton US Supreme Court · Apr 01, 1912
  3. Angel Vs. Bullington US Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1947
  4. Magnolia Petroleum Co. Vs. Hunt US Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1943
  5. Broderick Vs. Rosner US Supreme Court · Apr 01, 1935
  6. U.S. 609 (1951) U.S. Supreme Court Hughes v. Fetter
    Search
  7. U.S. 609 (1951) Hughes v. Fetter
    Search
  8. the Full Faith and Credit Clause would compel the courts of Wisconsin to entertain an action to enforce it. Kenney v. Supreme
    Search
  9. E.g., Broderick v. Rosner
    Search
  10. Bradford Elec. Light Co. v. Clapper
    Search
  11. Kenney v. Supreme
    Search
  12. U. S. 183 , 330 U. S. 188 . The reliance of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin on Chambers v. Baltimore
    Search
  13. can exclude from its courts causes of action created by another state for, as pointed out in Broderick v. Rosner
    Search
  14. E.g., Pink v. A.A
    Search
  15. Pacific Employers Ins. Co. v. Ind
    Search
  16. Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial
    Search
  17. Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial
    Search
  18. Order of United Commercial Travelers v. Wolfe
    Search
  19. Williams v. North
    Search
  20. See Broderick v. Rosner
    Search
  21. Anglo-American Provision Co. v. Davis
    Search
  22. Provision Co., 191 U. S. 373 , with Kenney v. Supreme
    Search
  23. Cf. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. George
    Search
  24. In certain previous cases, e.g., Pacific Employers Ins. Co. v. Industrial
    Search
  25. gone far in requiring that the courts of a State respect judgments entered by courts of other States. Fauntleroy v. Lum
    Search
  26. Kenney v. Supreme
    Search
  27. Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Hunt
    Search
  28. that a State must defer to the law of the incorporation, or to the law of the place of contract. Thus, in Broderick v. Rosner
    Search
  29. to suits which involved stockholder liability arising under the laws of New York. We had already said, in Converse v. Hamilton
    Search
  30. In John Hancock Mut. Life Insurance Co. v. Yates
    Search
  31. relationship involved which made the Full Faith and Credit Clause applicable. Page 341 U. S. 616 In Pink v. A.A
    Search
  32. assessments valid under the laws of the state of incorporation of a mutual insurance company. In Griffin v. McCoach
    Search
  33. policy in favor of beneficiaries who have no insurable interest under local law. Order of United Commercial Travelers v. Wolfe
    Search
  34. Hawkins v. Barney's
    Search
  35. Lessee, 5 Pet. 457, 30 U. S. 467 , quoted in Order of United Commercial Travelers v. Wolfe
    Search
  36. protecting the workman, however, has made this Court reluctant to impose rigid rules. In Bradford Electric Light Co. v. Clapper
    Search
  37. U.S. at 286 U. S. 164 -165. In Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial
    Search
  38. an Alaska statute purported to give an exclusive remedy to persons injured there. In Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. Industrial
    Search
  39. might be denied relief because the forum fails to provide a court with jurisdiction of the controversy, see Chambers v. Baltimore
    Search
  40. Douglas v. New
    Search
  41. but close them to actions for deaths outside the State, may not satisfy everyone's notion of wise policy. See Loucks v. Standard
    Search
  42. is neither novel nor without reason. Compare the similar Illinois statute which was before this Court in Kenney v. Supreme
    Search
  43. L.Rev. 386 (1942). These diversities reasonably suggest application by local judges versed in them. Compare Burford v. Sun
    Search
  44. Alabama Public Service Comm'n v. Southern
    Search
  45. of the Constitution. Compare Douglas v. New
    Search
  46. the lack of a forum in Wisconsin deprives the plaintiff of due process. Compare Brinkerhoff-Faris Trust & Savings Co. v. Hill
    Search
  47. Missouri v. Lewis
    Search
  48. U. S. 620 Nor is it argued that Wisconsin is flouting a federal statute. Compare Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Burnett
    Search
  49. U.S. Supreme Court Hughes v. Fetter
    Search
  50. Chambers v. Baltimore
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial