Rochester Tel. Corp. Vs. United States - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Apr-17-1939

Court: US Supreme Court

LAW: the Communications Act, the Urgent Deficiencies Act, Section 2(b)(2, the Valuation Act, the Railway Labor Act, the Valuations Act, Article 3 of the Constitution, Article 3, the Hepburn Act, Section 1

PERSON: Rochester Tel, Justice Brandeis, Justice White, Rochester, Muskrat, Bailey, Compare Keogh v. Chicago & N.W., Lehigh, Powell, Venner, Claiborne-Annapolis Ferry Co.

GPE: United States, U.S., NEW YORK, Rochester, New York, the City of Rochester, Wisconsin, the New York, MR, Shannahan, Shields, Piedmont, Compare United States, Colorado, Idaho

ORG: U.S. Supreme Court, Rochester Telephone Corp., Syllabus, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, Commission, District Court, Court, the Federal Communications Act, the District Court, Communications Commission, Rochester Telephone Corporation, the New York Telephone Company, the Telephone Division of the Communications Commission, Telephone Division, the Telephone Division, Rochester, Government, the District Court's, the Urgent Deficiencies Act, Regulate Commerce, Procter & Gamble Co., the National Mediation Board, Los Angeles & St.L. R. Co., Congress, Lehigh Valley R. Co., Inter-Mountain Rate Case, Procter & Gamble, the Commerce Court, The Commerce Court, the Commerce Page 307 U. S. 136 Court, Compare Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. Brimson, Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. Baird, the Procter & Gamble, Interstate Commerce Commission, the Mann-Elkins Act, Illinois Central R. Co., Interstate Commerce Comm'n, Recognition of the Commission's, Texas & Pacific Ry, Abilene Cotton Oil Co., Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. Union Pacific R. Co., Inter-Mountain Rate, the New River Co., the Communications Commission, Bell, the Department of Justice, the Executive Committee, the Board of Directors, an Executive Committee, the New York, the New York Company, the Rochester Telephone Corporation, Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd., McREYNOLDS, examiner, Corrick, Compare Federal Power Commission, Metropolitan Edison Co., Delaware & Hudson Co., Los Angeles & S.L. R. Co., Utah Idaho Central R. Co., the Circuit Court of Appeals, Judicial Code, Lehigh, S. Piedmont & Northern Ry, the Piedmont & Northern, the Piedmont & Northern, the Packers and Stockyards Act, the Railway Mail Pay Act, The Chicago Junction Case, Michigan Central R. Co.

CARDINAL: 307, 481, 1, 2, 3, one, 4, two, 23, 634, three, 126, 238, 28, 345, 47, 2(b)(2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 135, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 206, 21, One, 22, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 48,140, 1000, 335, 665, five, fifteen, 31, only one third, 221, 34, 409, 40, 828, 159, 267, 237, 344, 19-21, 280, 225

DATE: March 7, 1939, April 17, 1939, 1934, Oct. 22, 1913, October 22, 1913, 47a, October 9, 1935, November 18, 1936, 1912, 46, 47, 1887, 1906, 1910, 1920, 1913, November 13, 1935, two days, March 3, 1891, April 29, 1802, 20, 21, July 1, 1914, 18-22, 1916

NORP: F.Supp, §, Congressional

PRODUCT: Report

ORDINAL: first, third, second

WORK_OF_ART: Cases, 9 Pet

PERCENT: 234 U. S. 476, 222 U. S., eighty percent, 298 U. S. 435, 304 U. S. 375

TIME: forty-eight hours, 6 of the Act, 4 of the Act

MONEY: 100, 70,000, 66,500

EVENT: U.S.C. § 227

FAC: The Panama Canal Act, the Panama Canal Act, Lehigh