Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Schilling Vs. Rogers

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 20, 1960

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

45 entries 10 linked 35 unlinked
Show
  1. Becker Steel Co. of America Vs. Cummings US Supreme Court · Nov 11, 1935
  2. Leedom Vs. Kyne US Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1958
  3. Harmon Vs. Brucker US Supreme Court · Mar 03, 1958
  4. Stark Vs. Wickard US Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1944
  5. Gray Vs. Powell US Supreme Court · Dec 01, 1941
  6. Central Union Trust Co. Vs. Garvan US Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1921
  7. Markham Vs. Cabell US Supreme Court · Dec 10, 1945
  8. Mcgrath Vs. Kristensen US Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1950
  9. Accardi Vs. Shaughnessy US Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1954
  10. U.S. 666 (1960) U.S. Supreme Court Schilling v. Rogers
    Search
  11. U.S. 666 (1960) Schilling v. Rogers
    Search
  12. and it speaks to the future Page 363 U. S. 671 as well as the past. See also Central Union Trust Co. v. Garvan
    Search
  13. b), those sections apply only to World War I vestings. See Feyerabend v. McGrath
    Search
  14. Markham v. Cabell
    Search
  15. See Work v. Rives
    Search
  16. U. S. 175 , 267 U. S. 182 . Petitioner, however, relying on McGrath v. Kristensen
    Search
  17. bears little resemblance to the situation involved here. See Heikkila v. Barber
    Search
  18. Switchmen's Union v. National
    Search
  19. and the considerations set forth in the administrative decision upon which denial of this claim was based. See Reagan v. Farmers'
    Search
  20. be attended by quite different considerations than those controlling here. Cf., e.g., United States ex rel. Accardi v. Shaughnessy
    Search
  21. Additionally, the Declaratory Judgments Act is not an independent source of federal jurisdiction, Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips
    Search
  22. jurisdiction would not call for a referral of that issue to the Attorney General. Cf. United States Navigation Co. v. Cunard
    Search
  23. Far East Conference v. United
    Search
  24. Federal Maritime Board v. Isbrandtsen
    Search
  25. of judicial review of administrative action adjudicating private rights is not lightly to be inferred. See Leedom v. Kyne
    Search
  26. and such a command of the statute may be inferred from its purpose, Page 363 U. S. 678 though Leedom v. Kyne
    Search
  27. Becker Steel Co. v. Cummings
    Search
  28. distinguishes from making an application for an administrative return, the latter being optional. Draeger Shipping Co. v. Crowley
    Search
  29. Duisberg v. Crowley
    Search
  30. F.Supp. 365. See Stoehr v. Wallace
    Search
  31. that the administrator cannot stand on the ground he gave for not returning it. Page 363 U. S. 681 See Greene v. McElroy
    Search
  32. simply that the courts are to give their determination of this question of law considerable weight. Cf. Labor Board v. Hearst
    Search
  33. To my mind, McGrath v. Kristensen
    Search
  34. U.S. Supreme Court Schilling v. Rogers
    Search
  35. See Feyerabend v. McGrath
    Search
  36. See Heikkila v. Barber
    Search
  37. See Reagan v. Farmers'
    Search
  38. Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips
    Search
  39. the Attorney General. Cf. United States Navigation Co. v. Cunard
    Search
  40. See Leedom v. Kyne
    Search
  41. Draeger Shipping Co. v. Crowley
    Search
  42. See Stoehr v. Wallace
    Search
  43. See Greene v. McElroy
    Search
  44. Cf. Labor Board v. Hearst
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial