Court : US Supreme Court
Creary v. Weeks - 259 U.S. 336 (1922) U.S. Supreme Court Creary v. Weeks, 259 U.S. 336 (1922) United States ex Rel. Creary v. Weeks No. 725 Argued April 20, 1922 Decided May 29, 1922 259 U.S. 336 ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus 1. French v. Weeks, ante, 259 U. S. 326 , followed, to the effect that 24b of the Army Reorganization Act does not require personal and judicial action on the part of the President precedent to the final classification of an army officer as one to be retired or discharged from the Army. P. 259 U. S. 342 . 2. Section 24b of the Army Reorganization Act does not violate due process of law in not affording an officer who, after due hearing before a Court of Inquiry, has been classified by the Board of Final Classification as one who should not be retained in the service, a notice and a further hearing before the further determination, by another board, of the question whether the classification was due to his neg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
French v. Weeks - 259 U.S. 326 (1922) U.S. Supreme Court French v. Weeks, 259 U.S. 326 (1922) United States ex Rel. French v. Weeks No. 724 Argued April 20, 1922 Decided May 29, 1922 259 U.S. 326 ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus 1. The Army Reorganization Act of June 4, 1920, c. 227, 24b, 41 Stat. 773, provides (1) for a preliminary classification of all officers into two classes, A, those who should be, and B, those who should not be, retained in the service; (2) for a hearing of those placed in class B, before a Court of Inquiry, and (3) for a reconsideration of each case so heard by a Final Classification Board whose finding, it declares, "shall be final and not subject to further revision except upon the order of the President." Held: (a) That review of a finding of the Final Classification Board placing an officer in class B is discretionary with the President, not a right of the officer, and that the finality of the Board's action ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Continental Ins. Co. v. United States - 259 U.S. 156 (1922) U.S. Supreme Court Continental Ins. Co. v. United States, 259 U.S. 156 (1922) Continental Insurance Company v. United States Nos. 609, 610 Argued January 18, 19, 1922 Restored to docket for reargument February 27, 1922 Reargued April 10, 11, 1922 Decided May 29, 1922 259 U.S. 156 APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Syllabus 1. Upon an appeal under the Expedition Act of February 11, 1903, as modified by Jud.Code, 291, from a decree entered under a mandate of this Court directing the dissolution of a combination in restraint of interstate trade, this Court has jurisdiction, of its own motion and independently of the assignments of error, to determine whether the mandate has been properly complied with, and to require such compliance. P. 259 U. S. 165 . 2. A plan decreed by the district court (summarized in the opinion, post, 259 U. S. 166 ) for dissol...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Southern Pacific Co. - 259 U.S. 214 (1922) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Southern Pacific Co., 259 U.S. 214 (1922) United States v. Southern Pacific Company No. 5 Argued April 18, 19, 20, 1921 Restored to docket for reargument January 9, 1922 Reargued April 11, 12, 13, 1922 Decided May 29, 1922 259 U.S. 214 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH Syllabus 1. A combination whereby one railroad system, through stock purchases, acquires control of the whole or a vital part of another, with the effect of materially reducing free and normal competition in interstate trade between the two, violates the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. P. 259 U. S. 229 . 2. Inasmuch as the Central Pacific Railway System, with its eastern connections, and the Southern Pacific Railway System are normally competitors for railway traffic moving between California Page 259 U. S. 215 and the Atlantic seaboard and intermediate places, the acquisit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Ryan v. United States - 260 U.S. 90 (1922) U.S. Supreme Court Ryan v. United States, 260 U.S. 90 (1922) Ryan v. United States No. 64 Argued October 16, 1922 Decided November 13, 1922 260 U.S. 90 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus 1. Under 2733 and 2737, Rev.Stats. and the Act of March 3, 1881, c. 132, 21 Stat. 429, the Secretary of the Treasury was authorized to appoint inspectors of customs at New York at $4.00 per day. P. 260 U. S. 91 . 2. The Act of December 16, 1902, c. 2, 32 Stat. 753, authorized the Secretary to increase the per diem of such inspectors $1.00, but did not require it, nor did the appropriation acts of June 30, 1906, c. 3912, 34 Stat. 636, and March 4, 1907, c. 2919, id., 1373, make such increase mandatory. P. 260 U. S. 92 . 56 Ct.Clms. 103 affirmed. Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims rejecting a claim for additional pay as a customs inspector. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TAFT delivered the opinion of the Court. Ryan, the claimant and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Cullinan v. Walker - 262 U.S. 134 (1923) U.S. Supreme Court Cullinan v. Walker, 262 U.S. 134 (1923) Cullinan v. Walker No. 301 Argued March 9, 1923 Decided April 30, 1923 262 U.S. 134 ERROR TO HE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Syllabus 1. The gain accruing to a shareholder through enhancement of the value of his shares, and which, when segregated, becomes legally income subject to the income tax, may be segregated by a dividend made on liquidation of the corporation as well as by an ordinary dividend. P. 262 U. S. 137 . 2. Partly to comply with its state law and partly to procure additional credit for the business, an oil corporation was dissolved; its trustees in liquidation formed a producing corporation and a pipeline corporation, in the same state, transferred one-half of the assets to each, receiving from each in return its stock and its bonds, transferred all this stock to a holding corporation, which they formed in another s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Graham v. Du Pont - 262 U.S. 234 (1923) U.S. Supreme Court Graham v. Du Pont, 262 U.S. 234 (1923) Graham v. Du Pont No. 846 Argued April 30, 1923 Decided May 21, 1923 262 U.S. 234 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. Under 3224, Rev.Stats., federal taxing officers who, in the course of general jurisdiction over the subject matter, have made an assessment and claim that it is valid cannot be enjoined from collecting the tax upon the ground that the assessment is illegal. P. 262 U. S. 254 . 2. One who would contest the validity of a federal tax upon the ground that the assessment and the right to distrain were barred by a statutory time limitation should pay the tax and sue to recover it, and not seek relief by a suit to enjoin the Collector from distraining for the tax. P. 262 U. S. 255 . 3. Under 252 of the Revenue Act of 1918, reenacted in the Revenue Act of 1921, a taxpayer whose return of income was due March 15, 1916, and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Weiss v. Stearn - 265 U.S. 242 (1924) U.S. Supreme Court Weiss v. Stearn, 265 U.S. 242 (1924) Weiss v. Stearn Nos. 262 and 263 Argued April 30, 1924 Decided May 26, 1924 265 U.S. 242 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Pursuant to an agreement, the stockholders of an Ohio corporation deposited with a trustee their certificates for all its capital stock ($5,000,000), and other parties deposited $7,500,000; the depositors organized a new Ohio corporation with authorized capital stock of $25,000,000, and powers like those of the old corporation; the new corporation took over the property, assets and business of the old one, assuming its contracts and liabilities, and delivering certificates for all its stock to the trustee, in payment, and carried on the business under the old management; the old corporation was dissolved; the trustee delivered half of the new stock and the whole $7,500,000 to the old stockholders pro rata, and the other...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Terminal Railroad Assn. v. United States - 266 U.S. 17 (1924) U.S. Supreme Court Terminal Railroad Assn. v. United States, 266 U.S. 17 (1924) Terminal Railroad Association v. United States No. 115 Argued March 3, 4, 1924 Decided October 13, 1924 266 U.S. 17 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI Syllabus 1. Certain railway companies, defendants in a suit successfully prosecuted by the United States under the Sherman Law, instituted contempt proceedings against their codefendants, not to vindicate the authority of the court, but to enforce rights which the petitioners claimed under the original decree and alleged that the respondents were violating. The United States did not join in the complaint or participate in the hearing in the district court, but aligned itself with the petitioners on appeal. Held, that the contempt Page 266 U. S. 18 proceedings were civil and remedial, and not criminal. P. 266 U. S. 27 . 2. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Rogers v. United States - 270 U.S. 154 (1926) U.S. Supreme Court Rogers v. United States, 270 U.S. 154 (1926) Rogers v. United States No. 153 Argued January 20, 21, 1926 Decided March 1, 1926 270 U.S. 154 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus 1. The Army Reorganization Act of June 4, 1920, should be liberally construed to avoid unnecessary technical limitation upon the military agencies which are to carry it into effect. French v. Weeks, 259 U. S. 326 . P. 270 U. S. 160 . 2. The requirement of the Act that an officer before a court of inquiry shall be furnished with a full copy of the official records upon Page 270 U. S. 155 which his proposed classification as an officer who should not be retained in the service is based was sufficiently complied with to avoid invalidating the proceedings where the officer was furnished, for his own keeping and use, a copy of everything adverse to him in his record, and was given full opportunity in the court of inquiry to consul...
Tag this Judgment!