Us Supreme Court Court January 1902 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Louisville and Nashville R. Co. Vs. Kentucky
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1902
Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Kentucky - 184 U.S. 27 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Kentucky, 184 U.S. 27 (1902) Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Kentucky No. 10 Argued November 8, 11, 1901 Decided January 27, 1902 184 U.S. 27 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SIMPSON COUNTY, STATE OF KENTUCKY Syllabus Section 218 of the Constitution of the Kentucky reads as follows: "It shall be unlawful for any person or corporation owning or operating a railroad in this state, or any common carrier, to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggregate for the transportation of passengers, or of property of like kind, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, for a shorter than for a longer distance over the same line, in the same direction, the shorter being included within the longer distance; but this shall not be construed as authorizing any common carrier or person or corporation owning or operating a railroad in this st...
King Vs. Portland
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1902
King v. Portland - 184 U.S. 61 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court King v. Portland, 184 U.S. 61 (1902) King v. Portland City No. 307 Argued November 18-19, 1901 Decided January 27, 1902 184 U.S. 61 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON Syllabus Under the facts of this case and the interpretation given of the charter of the City of Portland by the Supreme Court of the Oregon, this Court is of opinion that the plaintiffs in error have not been deprived of their property without due process of law. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court. MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court. The object of this suit was to restrain the enforcement of certain street assessments levied upon the property of the plaintiffs in error under the charter of the City of Portland, Oregon. The question presented is whether the ordinances under which the assessments were made deprived plaintiffs in error of their property without due process of law, and thereby violated the ...
Louisville Trust Co. Vs. Comingor
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1902
Louisville Trust Co. v. Comingor - 184 U.S. 18 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Louisville Trust Co. v. Comingor, 184 U.S. 18 (1902) Louisville Trust Company v. Comingor No. 309 Submitted April 29, 1901 Decided January 27, 1902 184 U.S. 18 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus A general assignment for the benefit of creditors had been made under the statutes of Kentucky in that behalf and a suit involving the administration and settlement of the assigned estate was pending in the state Circuit Court, when a petition in bankruptcy was filed against the assignors, to which the assignee was made defendant, although no special relief was prayed for as against him, but an injunction was granted restraining all the defendants from taking any steps affecting the estate, and especially in the suit pending in the state court. The assignee had paid into court in that suit a considerable amount of money which, on the trustee in bankruptcy's becoming a part...
United States Vs. Southern Pacific R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1902
United States v. Southern Pacific R. Co. - 184 U.S. 49 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Southern Pacific R. Co., 184 U.S. 49 (1902) United States v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company No. 25 Argued April 18-19, 1901 Decided January 27, 1902 184 U.S. 49 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus This case is a continuation of Southern Pacific Railroad Co. v. United States, 188 U. S. 1 , brought to quiet the title of the government to lands within the limits of the forfeited grant to the Atlantic and Pacific Railroad Company. The questions in this case arise between the United States and parties holding title or claiming rights to lands by deed from or contract with the railroad company. The title of the company having been adjudged void, the Acts of March 3, 1887, 24 Stat. 556; of February 12, 1896, 29 Stat. 8; of March 2, 1896, 29 Stat. 42, were passed for the purpose Page 184 U. S. 50 of upholding the titles of parties who, in goo...
Mueller Vs. Nugent
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-20-1902
Mueller v. Nugent - 184 U.S. 1 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Mueller v. Nugent, 184 U.S. 1 (1902) Mueller v. Nugent No. 257 Argued and submitted November 13, 1901 Decided January 20, 1902 184 U.S. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Referees in bankruptcy exercise much of the judicial authority of the court of bankruptcy, and may enter orders to show cause subject to revision by the district court. Commitment until assets of a bankrupt are surrendered pursuant to order does not constitute imprisonment for debt. The bankruptcy court has power to compel the surrender of money or other assets of the bankrupt in his possession, or that of someone for him, on petition and rule to show cause. The filing of a petition in bankruptcy is a caveat to all the world, and in effect an attachment and injunction, and on adjudication and qualification of trustee, the bankrupt's property is placed in the custody of the bankruptcy court, and title become...
Texas and Pacific Ry. Co. Vs. Callender
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1902
Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Callender - 183 U.S. 632 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Callender, 183 U.S. 632 (1902) Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Callender No. 78 Argued December 3, 1901 Decided January 13, 1902 183 U.S. 632 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus This action was brought by defendants in error to recover the value of 187 bales of cotton destroyed in the fire mentioned in Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Reiss, ante, 183 U. S. 621 . The facts as to the manner of doing business at Westwego are the same as those stated in that case, and also in the case of the Same Company v. Clayton, 173 U. S. 348 . The bill of lading contained the following clauses: "1. No carrier or party in possession of all or any of the property herein described shall be liable for any loss thereof or damage thereto by causes beyond its control, . . . or for loss or damage to property of any kind at any place occurring by fire o...
Groeck Vs. Southern Pacific R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1902
Groeck v. Southern Pacific R. Co. - 183 U.S. 690 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Groeck v. Southern Pacific R. Co., 183 U.S. 690 (1902) Groeck v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company No. 82 Argued December 5-6, 1901 Decided January 13, 1902 183 U.S. 690 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS NOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus This case was argued and submitted with Southern Pacific Railroad Company v. Bell, ante, 183 U. S. 675 , and by the same counsel, resembles that in all essential particulars, and is controlled by it. This was a bill in equity filed in the Circuit Court for the Southern District of California by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, plaintiff, against Otto Groeck and another, defendants, to obtain a decree declaring the company to be the rightful owner of the south half of a certain quarter section of land in Kings County, California, and that defendants hold the legal title thereto in trust for it, a conveyance of which was prayed. The amended bill, as abst...
Southern Pacific R. Co. Bell
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1902
Southern Pacific R. Co. Bell - 183 U.S. 675 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Southern Pacific R. Co. Bell, 183 U.S. 675 (1902) Southern Pacific Railroad Company v. Bell No. 20 Argued and submitted December 5-6, 1901 Decided January 13, 1902 183 U.S. 675 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus The Atlantic and Pacific Railroad Company took no title to lands within the indemnity limits of its grant until the deficiency in the place limits had been ascertained, and the company had exercised its right of selection. The Secretary of the Interior had no authority, upon the filing of a plat in the office of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, to withdraw lands lying within the indemnity limits of the grant from sale or preemption, and a patent issued to a settler under the land laws, prior to the selection made by the railroad company, of the land in dispute as lieu lands was held to be valid notwithstanding the lands lay within the forty-mile strip order...
Texas and Pacific Ry. Co. Vs. Reiss
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1902
Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Reiss - 183 U.S. 621 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Reiss, 183 U.S. 621 (1902) Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Reiss No. 77 Argued November 27, December 2, 1901 Decided January 13, 1902 183 U.S. 621 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus Where goods are carried by connecting railways, as between intermediate carriers, the duty of the one in possession at the end of his route is to deliver the goods to the succeeding carrier, or notify him of their arrival, and the former is not relieved of responsibility by unloading the goods at the end of his route and storing them in his warehouse without delivery or notice to or any attempt to deliver to his successor. In this case, it cannot be claimed that the defendant had either actually or constructively delivered the cotton to the steamship company at the time of the fire. If there be any doubt from the language used in a bill of lading as to its ...
Midway Co. Vs. Eaton
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1902
Midway Co. v. Eaton - 183 U.S. 602 (1902) U.S. Supreme Court Midway Co. v. Eaton, 183 U.S. 602 (1902) Midway Company v. Eaton No. 80 Argued December 4-5, 1901 Decided January 13, 1902 183 U.S. 602 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Syllabus Under the Act of July 17, 1854, c. 83, 10 Stat. 304, Sioux half-breed certificates were issued to Orillie Stram, a female half-breed, authorizing her to select and take one hundred and sixty acres of the public lands of the United States of the classes mentioned in said act. In June, 1883, she, through Eaton, her attorney in fact applied at the local land office to locate the same on public lands of the United States in that district, then unsurveyed, and filed a diagram of the desired lands sufficient to designate them. Those lands were not reserved by the government. Subsequently they were surveyed, and the scrip was located upon them, and the locations were allowed, and certificates of entry were issued. In 1886, Ori...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »