Noble V Union - Judgment Search Results

Noble Vs. Union River Logging R. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co. - 147 U.S. 165 (1893) U.S. Supreme Court Noble v. Union River Logging R. … Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co. - 147 U.S. 165 (1893) U.S. Supreme Court Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U.S. 165 (1893) Noble v. Union River Logging Railroad Company No. 1157 Argued

Maharaja Kishangarh Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: AIR1953Raj188; (1953)IILLJ214Raj

authority, which may become the subject of review in the Courts. The subject was under consideration in -- 'Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co.', (1893) 147 U. S. 164 (I), and Brown J. delivering the opinion of the

Pennhurst State Sch. Vs. Halderman

Court: US Supreme Court

it is his duty to exercise judgment and discretion; even although an individual may suffer by his mistake"); Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 , 147 U. S. 171 -172 (1893); Belknap v. Schild,

United States Vs. Conway

Court: US Supreme Court

121 U. S. 520 ; Doolan v. Carr, 125 U. S. 618 , 125 U. S. 625 ; Noble v. Union River Logging Railroad, 147 U. S. 165 , 147 U. S. 174 . It is true that the

Boesch Vs. Udall

Court: US Supreme Court

§ 221.37, has always been subject to judicial review. 30 U.S.C. (Supp. IV, 1963), § 226-2; see, e.g., Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 ; Moore v. Robbins, supra. We conclude that the judgment

Costello Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

citizenship); In re Sawyer, 124 U. S. 200 , 124 U. S. 200 -221 (jurisdictional amount). See generally Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 , 147 U. S. 173 -174. Decisions in the lower

United States Vs. Williams

Court: US Supreme Court

is true that there are certain essential facts that must exist to give any power to a court. Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 , 147 U. S. 173 . As the existence of

Larson Vs. Domestic and Foreign Commerce Corp.

Court: US Supreme Court

U. S. 22 (1890). [ Footnote 12 ] This case must therefore be clearly distinguished from cases like Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 (1893). In that case, it was held that the officer … (Emphasis added.) In support of the conclusion that the suit could be maintained, the Court relied first on Noble v. Union Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 (1893), a decision resting entirely on the officer's lack of statutory

Yearsley Vs. W. A. Ross Construction Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

S. 619 -620. See United States v. Lee, 106 U. S. 196 , 106 U. S. 220 -221; Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 , 147 U. S. 171 -172; Tindal v. Wesley, 167

United States Vs. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

14 . [ Footnote 19 ] Fall v. Eastin, 215 U. S. 1 . [ Footnote 20 ] Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 147 U. S. 165 ; cf. Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U. S. 458 .