Cox Vs. Hart - Semantic Analysis by spaCy
Decided on: Dec-11-1922
Court: US Supreme Court
LAW: Cox v. Hart - 260, Section 1, Hart v. Cox, the Resurvey Act, Page 260 U. S. 438 declaration
GPE: U.S., Imperial County, San Diego County, the United States, the State of California, San Bernardino, California, United States, St. Mary, Whitechapel
DATE: 1922, November 16, 1922, December 11, 1922, March 28, 1908, c. 112, 52, 90 days, About the years 1854-56, the year 1900, July 1, 1902, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, 1909, March third, eighteen hundred and seventy-seven, March third, eighteen hundred and ninety-one, ninety days, the year 1906, the year, November, 1906, November 8, 1906, March, 1909, July, 1907, the same month, October 24, 1918, 1854-56, 10, 1856, nearly 50 years later, 1902
ORG: U.S. Supreme Court, THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL, THE NINTH CIRCUIT, Syllabus, Congress, Court, State of California, Interior, the Interior Department, Act, the General Land Office, the Circuit Court of Appeals, the Ninth Circuit, appellee, Ellicott, Illinois Steel Co., Bilot, the Supreme Court of Iowa, Georgia Railway & Banking Co., Q.B. 120, Trans-Missouri Freight Association, L.D. 562, L.D. 113, Cox v. Hart
CARDINAL: 260, 1, 2, 35, 3, 4, 5, 270, 32, 728, sixteen, eleven, seventeen, 52, three hundred and twenty acres, 364, Two, 10, 412, 11, 41, 25, 177, 181, 109, 418, 443, more than one-fourth, 19, 377, 15, 423, one, 12, 127, 436, 29, 317, 325, 205, 160, 163, 38, 40, 566, 570, 16, 36, 42, 114, 592, 594
PERSON: Cox v. Hart No, appellee, appellee against, Hart v. Cox, Appellee, Ewing v. Burnet, Booth, White, Regina, Robinson, Forrest, Sawyer v. Gray, Morrison, Peterson, Stephenson
QUANTITY: around 320 acres, 160 acres, 320 acres, 320-acre, about 80 acres, about 5 acres, 160-acre, one-half mile, 5 acres
WORK_OF_ART: 'An Act, Booth & Graham v. Small & Small, Hart v. Cox
LOC: the Southern District
TIME: 1 of the Act of March 28, 1908
ORDINAL: first, fourth
NORP: Minis
PERCENT: 166 U. S. 290