As The Case May Be - Judgment Search Results
Case Vs. Nebraska
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-24-1965
production of the prisoner, whether or not a hearing is held. Testimony of the prisoner or other witnesses may be offered by deposition. The court need not entertain a second motion or successive motions for similar relief on … the court to vacate or set aside the sentence." "Unless the motion and the files and records of the case show to the satisfaction of the court that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall
Case Vs. Los Angeles Lumber Products Co., Ltd.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Nov-06-1939
City Terminal Ry. Co. v. Central Union Trust Co., supra, by the statement that, "when necessary, they [creditors] may be protected through other arrangements, which distinctly recognize their equitable right to be preferred to stockholders against the full … Case v. Los Angeles Lumber Products Co., Ltd. - 308 U.S. 106 (1939) U.S. Supreme Court Case v. Los
Case Vs. Bowles
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-04-1946
these lands shall not be sold except "at public auction to the highest bidder" at a price which may not be below both the full market value found after appraisal, and "the price prescribed in the grant" … enforcement would violate the Emergency Price Control Act, § 266 of the Judicial Code does not require that the case be tried by a three-judge court. P. 327 U. S. 97 . 7. Neither Art. III, § 2,
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Case Vs. Kelly
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-06-1890
Wisconsin cannot make that a public law which in its essential nature is a private law. However this may be, we do not doubt the authority of the legislature of a state to enact that after the passage … made by him in good faith upon the real estate in controversy before being required to convey it. The case, as stated by the court, was as follows: The Green Bay and Minnesota Railroad Company being in the
Beauregard Vs. Case
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-01-1875
not extinguished or compensated by the indebtedness of the creditor to one of the partners, although such partner may, by way of defense or by exception, as it is termed in the practice of Louisiana, offset or … by his counsel assumed that they were thus used, and Page 91 U. S. 141 if such were the case, there can be no doubt of his liability for the same jointly with his partners unless by the
Case Vs. Beauregard
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-01-1878
Frank F. Case, receiver of the First National Bank of New Orleans, against Gustave T. Beauregard, Thomas P. May, Augustus C. Graham, Page 99 U. S. 120 George Binder, Alexander Bonneval, Joseph Hernandez, the New Orleans and … equity invoked by the complainant. The important question is whether those principles are applicable to the facts of the case. No doubt the effects of a partnership belong to it so long as it continues in existence, and
Case Vs. Marchland
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1879
a question of fact, the Court affirms the decree of the court below. Page 154 U. S. 643 The case is stated in the opinion. MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the Court. The Crescent City National
Case Vs. Bank
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-01-1879
452 So an action against a telegraph company for loss on goods by a mistake in the message may be maintained unless prescribed by ten years. La Grange v. Southwestern Telegraph Co., 25 La.Ann. 383. Cases in great … rata with those already paid to the creditors of the Crescent City National Bank." The receiver, thereupon, brought the case here. The remaining facts are set forth in the opinion of the Court. MR. JUSTICE CLIFFORD delivered the
Case Vs. Beauregard
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-01-1879
They are not the only possible means of proof. The necessity of resort to a court of equity may be made otherwise to appear. Accordingly, the rule, though general, is not without many exceptions. Neither law nor equity … to the present suit, it having been pleaded, unless the court which dismissed it was without jurisdiction of the case. In the former bill it was not averred that judgment at law had ever been recovered against the
Case Vs. Brown
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-01-1864
that Case originally invented his machine, a person named Brown invented one also, and got a patent in May, 1855. The parties were independent inventors. In its essential features, Brown's machine differed from Case's in not employing … if the change were one of substance and requiring the exercise of inventive power." Thus, the charge made the case turn on the question whether the defendant employed in his machine, as one element of his combination, a
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · drag or use +/− to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free