Court : US Supreme Court
Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate - 220 U.S. 187 (1911) U.S. Supreme Court Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate, 220 U.S. 187 (1911) Zonne v. Minneapolis Syndicate No. 627 Argued January 19, 1911 Decided March 13, 1911 220 U.S. 187 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Syllabus A corporation, the sole purpose whereof is to hold title to a single parcel of real estate subject to a long lease and, for convenience of the stockholders, to receive and distribute the rentals arising from such lease and proceeds of disposition of the land, and which has disqualified itself from doing any other business, is not a corporation doing business within the meaning of the corporation tax provisions of the Act of August 5, 190, c. 6, 36 Stat. 11, 112, and is not subject to the tax. Page 220 U. S. 188 The facts, which involve the construction of the Corporation Tax Law, are stated in the opinion. Page 220 U. S. 189 MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Vilas v. Manila - 220 U.S. 345 (1911) U.S. Supreme Court Vilas v. Manila, 220 U.S. 345 (1911) Vilas v. Manila No. 53, 54, 207 Argued February 24, 27, 1911 Decided April 3, 1911 220 U.S. 345 ERROR TO AND APPEALS FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS Syllabus Even if there is no remedy adequate to the collection of a claim against a governmental subdivision when reduced to judgment, a plaintiff having a valid claim is entitled to maintain an action thereon and reduce it to judgment. Where the case turned below on the consequence of a change in sovereignty by reason of the cession of the Philippine Islands, the construction of the Treaty with Spain of 1898 is involved, and this Court has jurisdiction of an appeal from the Supreme Court of the Philippine Page 220 U. S. 346 Islands under 10 of the Act of July 1, 1902, c. 1369, 32 Stat. 691, 695. While military occupation or territorial cession may work a suspension of the governmental functions of municipal corpo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Acme Harvester Co. v. Beekman Lumber Co. - 222 U.S. 300 (1911) U.S. Supreme Court Acme Harvester Co. v. Beekman Lumber Co., 222 U.S. 300 (1911) Acme Harvester Company v. Beekman Lumber Company No. 9 Argued April 25, 1911 Decided December 18, 1911 222 U.S. 300 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI Syllabus The denial of a right claimed under the judgment of a federal court lays the foundation for a review in this Court, and where the state court proceeds to judgment on the ground that bankruptcy proceedings against the defendant had been concluded by denial of adjudication and the injunction against suits in the state court thereby dissolved, this Court has jurisdiction. A finding by the state court that bankruptcy proceedings had been concluded by denial of adjudication does not conclude this Court on writ of error to review the judgment of the state court. Where the state court bases its jurisdiction entirely on the construction given a federal statute by it...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Plummer v. United States - 224 U.S. 137 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Plummer v. United States, 224 U.S. 137 (1912) Plummer v. United States No. 177 Argued February 29, March 1, 1912 Decided April 1, 1912 224 U.S. 137 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus Under 13 of the Navy Personnel Act of March 3, 1899, 30 Stat. 1007, c. 413, and the Acts of June 7, 1900, 31 Stat. 697, c. 859, March 2, 1907, 34 Stat. 1167, c. 2511, and May 13, 1908, 35 Stat. 127, c. 166, the pay of acting assistant surgeons was enhanced and assimilated to that of assistant surgeons in the Army, and did not remain fixed as regulated by 1556, Rev.Stat. Where an act of Congress, such as the Navy Personnel Act of 1899, provides for a standard by which to determine rank and pay of officers, it will not be presumed that Congress intended to create an inequality of compensation while leaving unmodified equality of rank and duty, and so held as to the provisions for pay of assistant surgeons and acting assis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Terminal Railroad Ass'n - 224 U.S. 383 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Terminal Railroad Ass'n, 224 U.S. 383 (1912) United States v. Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis No. 386 Argued October 20, 23, 1911 Decided April 22, 1912 224 U.S. 383 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI Syllabus Whether the unification of terminals in a railroad center is a permissible facility in aid of interstate commerce, or an illegal combination in restraint thereof, depends upon the intent to be inferred from the extent of the control secured over the instrumentalities which such commerce is compelled to use, the method by which such control has been obtained, and the manner in which it is exercised. The unification of substantially every terminal facility by which the traffic of St. Louis is served is a combination in restraint of interstate Page 224 U. S. 384 trade within the meaning and purposes of the A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Ex Parte United States - 226 U.S. 420 (1913) U.S. Supreme Court Ex Parte United States, 226 U.S. 420 (1913) Ex Parte United States No. 10, Original Submitted December 16, 1912 Decided January 6, 1913 226 U.S. 420 PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION Syllabus Unless the repeal be express or the implication to that end be irresistible, a general law does not repeal a special statutory provision affording a remedy for specific cases. Petri v. Creelman Lumber Co., 199 U. S. 48 . The special provisions of the Expedition Act of February 11, 1903, 32 Stat. 823, c. 544, requiring in a particular class of cases the organization of a court constituted in a particular manner, were not repealed by the Judicial Code of 1911. The new district court created by the Judicial Code of 1911 is the successor of the formerly existing Circuit Court, and as such is vested with the duty of hearing and disposing of cases under the Expedition Act of 1903, 291. Section 291 of the Judicial Code of 19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Bogart v. Southern Pacific Co. - 228 U.S. 137 (1913) U.S. Supreme Court Bogart v. Southern Pacific Co., 228 U.S. 137 (1913) Bogart v. Southern Pacific Company No. 165 Argued March 5, 1913 Decided April 7, 1913 228 U.S. 137 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus The question intended to be brought to this Court by direct appeal under 5 of the Circuit Court of Appeals Act is the jurisdiction of the circuit court as a federal court; questions of general jurisdiction applicable as well to state as to federal tribunals are not included in such review. The question cannot be brought into the record by certificate if not really presented, and whether so presented or not this Court will determine for itself. Darnell v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 225 U. S. 243 . Page 228 U. S. 138 Neither 737, Rev.Stat., nor Equity Rule 47 defines what an indispensable party to an action is, but each simply formulates principles already c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
McCoach v. Minehill & Schuylkill Haven R. Co. - 228 U.S. 295 (1913) U.S. Supreme Court McCoach v. Minehill & Schuylkill Haven R. Co., 228 U.S. 295 (1913) McCoach v. Minehill & Schuylkill Haven Railroad Company No. 670 Argued January 14, 15, 1913 Decided April 7, 1913 228 U.S. 295 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus The corporation tax is imposed upon the doing of corporate business and with respect to the carrying on thereof, and not upon the franchises or property of the corporation irrespective of their use in business. Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U. S. 107 , 220 U. S. 145 . A railway corporation which has leased its railroad to another company operating it exclusively, but which maintains its corporate existence and collects and distributes to its stockholders the rental from the lessee and also dividends from investments, is not doing business within the meaning of the Corporation Tax Act. Park Realty Company case sub Flint...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Boyd - 228 U.S. 482 (1913) U.S. Supreme Court Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Boyd, 228 U.S. 482 (1913) Northern Pacific Railway Company v. Boyd No. 47 Argued November 11, 12, 1912 Decided April 28, 1913 228 U.S. 482 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus A corporation acquiring stock control of a railroad company and leasing it becomes liable to account to the leased company for the amount of bonds in the treasury of the leased company diverted by it; that liability can be enforced by a creditor of the leased company who is unable to collect his judgment on account of the insolvency of the leased company which has resulted from the lease itself. Chicago Railway v. Chicago Bank, 134 U. S. 277 . A lessor railroad company which has once become liable for diversion of bonds from the treasury of a lessee company remains so until the bonds are restored; nor is the obligation lessened by disbursements made on account of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1914Mad162; (1914)ILR37Mad462; 22Ind.Cas.899; (1914)26MLJ189
1. The second defendant, one of the three judgment-debtors, is the appellant before this Court. This appeal has arisen out of an execution petition put in by the decree-holder. The facts are a little complicated, and though it is not necessary to retail all the facts, it is necessary to set out the following for understanding the contentions on both sides:2. The decree in this case was passed so long ago as March 1898 in favour of one Arunachallam Chettiyar. There were several execution petitions by the said decree-holder himself. The decree is then alleged to have fallen, in a partition between two members of the decree holder's family and a partner of the family firm, to the share of the said partner who also held a power of attorney from the decree-holder. This partner filed execution petitions in 1905 and 1907. Finally on the 21st April 1909, Execution Petition No. 389 of 1909 was filed by a next friend on behalf of the minor son of the said partner after the death of the latter.3....
Tag this Judgment!