Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-31-1949
..... the court reversed the judgment and remanded the cause for trial. on remand, petitioner amended his complaint to charge specifically violations of the boiler inspection act. section 2 of that act, as amended, makes it "unlawful for any carrier to use or permit to be used on its line and locomotive unless said locomotive, its boiler ..... negligence, in its cars, engines, appliances, machinery, track, roadbed, works, boats, wharves, or other equipment." 45 u.s.c. 51. (emphasis added.) the section does not define negligence, leaving that question to be determined, as the missouri supreme court said, "by the common law principles as established and applied in the federal courts ..... is as much "injury," leading in time as certainly to permanent disability, as scalding from a boiler's explosion. we do not think the mere difference in the time required for different acts of negligence to take effect and disclose their harmful, disabling consequences would justify excluding the one type of injury from .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-28-1949
..... , such as the supply of shells to the army "filled not with the proper explosive materials for use, but with sawdust." cong.globe, 37th cong., 3d sess. 955 (1863). this action of the 1863 congress does not support an ..... the court of appeals rejected this suggested interpretation of the article, and the contention is not urged here. [ footnote 2 ] the discussion of the 1863 act showed that congress rather grudgingly conceded this comparatively slight expansion of the court-martial power, apparently prompted by reports of particularly abhorrent recent frauds by war contractors ..... a power to courts-martial, but only in the very limited category of offenses there defined -- frauds against the government. [ footnote 2 ] since the 1863 act, congress has not passed any measure that page 336 u. s. 216 directly expanded court-martial powers over discharged servicemen, whether they reenlisted or not. obviously, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-17-1949
..... and privileges whether affirmative or negative in form, 227.15, and is allowed any person aggrieved and directly affected by the administrative decision. 227.16. [ footnote 2 ] section 111.05(4) provides: "the fact that one election has been held shall not prevent the holding of another election among the same group of employees, provided that ..... the national labor relations act, amended, now provides in part: "the board is empowered by agreement with any agency of any state or territory ..... under the wisconsin act also excludes certain strikers and others who have not been at work for certain periods. 111.02(3). these latter exceptions likewise do not, in the main, square with the definition of employee contained in 2(3) of the federal act. [ footnote 10 ] u.s.const. art. vi. [ footnote 11 ] section 10(a) of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-20-1949
..... be limited to those cases and controversies enumerated in art. iii. i would not sacrifice that principle on the altar of expediency. ii there are numerous sections of the constitution which are concerned solely with the mechanics of government, and, of necessity, set rather arbitrary limits upon the exercise of power by the ..... were not concerned with the constitutional grant of jurisdiction, nor with the specific page 337 u. s. 614 statutory grant of jurisdiction found in the bankruptcy act and approved in schumacher v. beeler, supra. it has never heretofore been doubted that the constitutional grant of power is broader than the general federal question ..... express attempt to remedy the inequality which has obtained over since chief justice marshall, in hepburn and dundas v. ellzey, supra, construed the first judiciary act to exclude citizens of the district of columbia. marshall's construction of the 1789 statute was founded on his conclusion that the comparable language of the diversity .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-31-1949
..... the use of sound amplifying systems." perhaps the last-quoted paragraph assumes that all sound trucks emit loud and raucous noises. [ footnote 7 ] he wrote: "section 4 of the ordinance, under which appellant was charged, prohibits any person from using for any purpose whatsoever, a loudspeaker or sound amplifier which emits therefrom 'loud ..... were involved. no man should be subject to punishment under a statute when even a bare majority of judges upholding the conviction cannot agree upon what acts the statute denounces. what the effect of this decision may be, i cannot foretell, except that kovacs will stand convicted and the division among the ..... safety, and comprehends the duty, within constitutional limitations, to protect the wellbeing and tranquility of a community. [ footnote 4 ] a state or city may prohibit acts or things reasonably thought to bring evil or harm to its people. in this case, new jersey necessarily has construed this very ordinance as applied to sound amplification. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-31-1949
..... as an indian reservation any area of land which has been reserved for the use and occupancy of indians or eskimos by section 8 of the act of may 17, 1884 (23 stat. 26), or by section 14 or section 15 of the act of march 3, 1891 (26 stat. 1101), or which has been heretofore reserved under any executive order and placed ..... vicinity: provided, that such designation shall be effective only upon its approval by the vote of the indian and eskimo residents of the area involved in accordance with section 2 of the act of may 1, 1936, supra: and provided further, that nothing herein contained shall affect any valid existing claim or right under the laws of the united states ..... of any kind. its only reference to acquisition of lands by or for indians is in 5, where appropriations are authorized for that purpose. this section is inapplicable here. section 2 of the extending act, set out at the beginning of this opinion, page 337 u. s. 91 supra, gives no power to the secretary to dispose finally of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-17-1949
..... of a taxing statute, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the taxpayer, we feel bound to hold that the joint resolution of 1931 and section 803(a) of the act of 1932 apply only to transfers with reservation of life income made subsequent to the dates of their adoption respectively." "holding this view, we need ..... or enjoyment" clause in death tax statutes, and with what appears to be complete unanimity, they have, up to this day, despite may v. heiner, substantially agreed with this 1884 pennsylvania supreme court interpretation. [ footnote 6 ] congress used the "possession or enjoyment" clause in death tax legislation in 1862, 1864, and 1898. 12 stat. 432, 485; ..... "possession or enjoyment" provision appearing in 811(c) seems to have originated in a pennsylvania inheritance tax law in 1826. [ footnote 5 ] as early as 1884, the supreme court of pennsylvania held that, where a legal transfer of property was made which carried with it a right of possession with a reservation by the grantor .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-27-1949
..... the cases are myriad, and it is unnecessary to review them here. [ footnote 22 ] poindexter v. greenhow, 114 u. s. 270 , 114 u. s. 288 (1884); philadelphia co. v. stimson, supra, p. 223 u. s. 605 . although stated in reference to a suit for damages, the rule of the lee line of cases ..... is as follows: "(1) that this court issue its temporary restraining order against the defendant, his agents, assistants, deputies, and employees and all persons acting or assuming to act under their direction, enjoining and restraining them from:" "(a) carrying into effect the purported illegal and unauthorized cancellation of the sale to the plaintiff of ..... [ footnote 5 ] it asked for an injunction against him in that capacity, and against "his agents, assistants, deputies and employees and all persons acting or assuming to act under their direction." the relief sought was, in short, relief against the administration for wrongs allegedly committed by subordinate officials in that administration. the question .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-27-1949
..... which he alleged his arrest, trial, conviction, and sentence, and in which he also stated that he "was denied counsel, and, through ignorance of law and fact, was forced to act as his own counsel," and that he "was denied his constitutional rights as set forth in the ten original amendments, article vi." upon the issuance of a rule to show .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-04-1949
..... limitation on maintenance and cure. when congress has had under consideration substitution of a system of workmen's compensation on the principles of the longshoremen's and harbor workers' compensation act, 44 stat. 1424, as amended, 33 u.s.c. 901-950, organized seamen, as we have heretofore noted, have steadfastly opposed the change. hust v. moore-mccormack lines, 328 u ..... u. s. 521 . page 336 u. s. 512 mr. justice jackson delivered the opinion of the court. petitioner, a seaman, brought suit in admiralty to recover damages under the jones act, and maintenance, cure and wages under maritime law. the issue of negligence was decided against him by both courts below, and the claim is abandoned here. petition for certiorari to .....
Tag this Judgment!