Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-23-1903
Indiana Mfg. Co. v. Koehne - 188 U.S. 681 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Indiana Mfg. Co. v. Koehne, 188 U.S. 681 (1903) Indiana Manufacturing Company v. Koehne No. 177 Argued October 21, 1902 Decided February 23, 1903 188 U.S. 681 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF INDIANA Syllabus Certain taxes having been assessed against complainant, an Indiana corporation, pursuant to a law of Indiana upon the value of letters patent owned by it, an action was brought against the collector to enjoin the collection of such taxes, the appeal to equity being founded on the grounds: (1) That the assessment constituted a cloud upon title; (2) that there was no adequate remedy at law; (3) that a multiplicity of suits would be avoided; (4) that it would prevent irreparable injury to complainant. Held: (1) That, in the absence of any statute making the assessment upon shares a lien on the real estate and of any averment that the company owned any real estate, n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-01-1903
Johanson v. Washington - 190 U.S. 179 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Johanson v. Washington, 190 U.S. 179 (1903) Johanson v. Washington No. 282 Argued May 1, 1903 Decided June 1, 1903 190 U.S. 179 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON Syllabus Whether one assuming to act for a state or territory in selecting school lands in lieu of sections 18 and 36 had the authority to do so is a state, and not a federal, question. The policy of the government in respect to grants for school purposes has been a generous one, and acts making such grants are to be so construed as to carry out the intent of Congress, however difficult it might be to give full effect to the language used if the grants were by instrument of private conveyance. Page 190 U. S. 180 While ordinarily a special law is not repealed by a subsequent general statute, unless the intent so to do is obvious, yet the latter act may apply to cases not provided for by the former. The general act of Congress of 18...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-23-1903
United States v. Barringer - 188 U.S. 577 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Barringer, 188 U.S. 577 (1903) United States v. Barringer No. 252 Argued January 6, 1903 Decided February 23, 1903 188 U.S. 577 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus The provisions in the Sundry Civil Appropriation Act of June 11, 1896, and in the prior acts of Congress referred to in the opinion in regard to leaves of absence to the employs of the government Printing Office, and for pro rata extra pay to those not receiving leaves of absence, relate only to permanent employs, or employs regularly employed on the Congressional Record, and do not relate to temporary employs. This construction of the statutes referred to is in accord with the interpretation placed thereon by the Public Printer and also by Congress in appropriating for the payment of such extra pay allowed in lieu of such leaves of absence. The findings of the Court of Claims upon which it predicated the conclusion that ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-23-1903
The Manila Prize Cases - 188 U.S. 254 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court The Manila Prize Cases, 188 U.S. 254 (1903) The Manila Prize Cases Nos. 309-311 Argued October 28-29, 1902 Decided January 23, 1903 188 U.S. 254 APPEALS FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus While the right of the citizen to demand condemnation of vessels or property as prize for his benefit must be derived from acts of Congress, and their scope is not to be enlarged in his favor by construction, where there is no controversy in respect to the existence of the grant, a more liberal construction may be applied in carrying the intention of Congress into effect. 1. Vessels lying on the bottom in shallow water in such condition, as the result of a naval engagement, that they cannot be floated by any of the means possessed by the naval force overcoming them, but which are afterwards, by the independent means of the government, raised and repaired and appropriated to its own use, are not to be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-16-1903
Eckington & Soldiers' Home Ry. Co. v. McDevitt - 191 U.S. 103 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Eckington & Soldiers' Home Ry. Co. v. McDevitt, 191 U.S. 103 (1903) Eckington & Soldiers' Home Railway Company v. McDevitt No. 9 Argued January 21, 1903 Resubmitted March 9, 1903 Decided November 16, 1903 191 U.S. 103 ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus Plaintiff (below) contracted with defendant street railway company to convey to it a right of way through her land and to pay five hundred dollars in five years, it to construct extension over such right of way and operate same, running cars at certain designated hours. The right of way was conveyed, the note given, the extension constructed and operated for several years, after which the railroad company ceased and refused to run its cars at the times designated, whereupon, her note being then overdue and unpaid, plaintiff demanded the removal of the tracks, which was done. In an action to recover damages ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : House of Lords
Decided on : May-11-1903
LORD MACNAGHTEN. My Lords, this appeal raises in a slightly different form and with some difference of circumstance the question which this House had to consider in the recent case of Noakes v. Rice.(1) Your Lordships, I think, have nothing to do now but to determine whether the distinction between the present case and the case of Noakes v. Rice(1), as finally decided, is or is not a solid and substantial difference leading to a different result. Other points, no doubt, were discussed at the bar, but the only effect of the discussion (1) [1902] A. C. 24. was to incumber and embarrass the argument on the one point which was really arguable. In my view, all these other points were and are immaterial, and I pass them by altogether. The distinction between Noakes v. Rice(1) and the case under review is brought out very clearly in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which was delivered by Stirling L.J. It is, I need not say, a most careful judgment, to which little or nothing could be adde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-27-1903
Giles v. Harris - 189 U.S. 475 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Giles v. Harris, 189 U.S. 475 (1903) Giles v. Harris No. 493 Submitted February, 24, 1903 Decided April 27, 1903 189 U.S. 475 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA Syllabus A Circuit Court of the United States in Alabama has not jurisdiction of an action in equity brought by a colored man, resident in Alabama, on behalf of himself and other negroes to compel the board of registrars to enroll their names upon the voting lists of the county in which they reside under a constitution alleged to be contrary to the Constitution of the United States. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. Page 189 U. S. 482 MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court. This is a bill in equity brought by a colored man on behalf of himself "and on behalf of more than five thousand negroes, citizens of the County of Montgomery, Alabama, similarly situated and circumstanced ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Dec-21-1903
White v. United States - 191 U.S. 545 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court White v. United States, 191 U.S. 545 (1903) White v. United States No. 76 Argued November 11-12, 1903 Decided December 21, 1903 191 U.S. 545 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus Retrospective legislation is not favored. Unless the intention that a law is to have a retrospective operation is clearly evidenced in the law and its purposes, the Court will presume that it was enacted for the future, and not for the past. The provisions of the Navy Personnel Act of March 3, 1899, 30 Stat. 1004, as to crediting officers appointed from civil life with five years' service on the date of appointment for the purpose of computing their pay apply to the pay of officers theretofore appointed from the commencement of the then next fiscal year, when the act, by its terms, went into operation, and such provisions do not apply to readjusting compensation for any period prior thereto, thereby giving increased pay to officers ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-02-1903
Ross v. Aguirre - 191 U.S. 60 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Ross v. Aguirre, 191 U.S. 60 (1903) Ross v. Aguirre No. 19 Argued October 14, 1903 Decided November 2, 1903 191 U.S. 60 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus Under the decisions of the highest court of California, an act of legislature entitled "An Act to amend sections 204, 205, 206 and 208 of the Code of Civil Procedure" is not void as contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of the state providing that every act of the legislature shall embrace but one subject which shall be expressed in its title. One convicted after indictment by a grand jury impaneled under the provisions of Code as so amended is not deprived of his liberty without due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Appeal from an order denying a writ of habeas corpus. The respondent is the warden of the state prison of the State of California at San Quentin, and holds...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-23-1903
Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. McGrew - 188 U.S. 291 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. McGrew, 188 U.S. 291 (1903) Mutual Life Insurance Company v. McGrew No. 109 Argued January 15-16, 1902 Decided February 23, 1903 188 U.S. 291 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus To maintain a writ of error asserted under the third of the classes of cases enumerated in section 709, Rev.Stat., the right, title, privilege or immunity relied on must not only be specially set up or claimed, but (1) at the proper time, which is in the trial court whenever that is required by the state practice, as it is in California, and (2) in the proper way, by pleading, motion, exception, or other action, part or being made part, of the record, showing that the claim was presented to the court. Where it is claimed that the decision of a state court was against a right, title, or immunity claimed under a treaty between the United States and a foreign country and no claim ...
Tag this Judgment!