Us Supreme Court Court January 1908 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.
United States Vs. Graf Distilling Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1908
United States v. Graf Distilling Co. - 208 U.S. 198 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Graf Distilling Co., 208 U.S. 198 (1908) United States v. Graf Distilling Company No. 24 Argued December 16, 1907 Decided January 27, 1908 208 U.S. 198 CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus A revenue statute containing provisions of a highly penal nature should be construed in a fair and reasonable manner and, notwithstanding plain and unambiguous language, provisions for the prevention of evasion of taxation, which naturally are applicable to taxable articles only, will not be held applicable to articles not taxable, wholly harmless, and not used for an illegal purpose, in an improper manner, or in any way affording opportunities to defraud the revenue. The sale of a barrel of whiskey, stamped, branded and marked so as to show that the contents have been duly inspected, and the tax thereon paid, into which a nontaxable substance has been i...
Braxton County Court Vs. West Virginia
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1908
Braxton County Court v. West Virginia - 208 U.S. 192 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Braxton County Court v. West Virginia, 208 U.S. 192 (1908) Braxton County Court v. West Virginia No. 124 Submitted January 14, 1908 Decided January 27, 1908 208 U.S. 192 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA Syllabus Speaking generally, and subject to the rule that no state can set at naught the provisions of the national Constitution, the regulation of municipal corporations is peculiarly within state control, the legislature determining the taxing body, the taxing districts, and the limits of taxation. Notwithstanding that plaintiff in error's charge of unconstitutionality of a state statute may not be frivolous, in order to give this Court jurisdiction to review the action of the state court sustaining the statute the question must be raised in this Court by one adversely affected by the decision and whose interest is personal, and not of an official nature. Smi...
Adair Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1908
Adair v. United States - 208 U.S. 161 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Adair v. United States, 208 U.S. 161 (1908) Adair v. United States No. 293 Argued October 29, 30, 1907 Decided January 27, 1908 208 U.S. 161 ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY Syllabus It is not within the power of Congress to make it a criminal offense against the United States for a carrier engaged in interstate commerce, or an agent or officer thereof, to discharge an employee simply because of his membership in a labor organization, and the provision to that effect in 10 of the act of June 1, 1898, 30 Stat. 424, concerning interstate carriers is an invasion of personal liberty, as well as of the right of property, guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and is therefore unenforceable as repugnant to the declaration of that amendment that no person shall be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law. Whil...
Elder Vs. Wood
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1908
Elder v. Wood - 208 U.S. 226 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Elder v. Wood, 208 U.S. 226 (1908) Elder v. Wood No. 85 Argued January 9, 1908 Decided January 27, 1908 208 U.S. 226 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF COLORADO Syllabus A valid subsisting mining location, such as the Comstock lode, or an interest therein, is property distinct from the land itself, vendible, inheritable, and taxable as such by the state, notwithstanding the land may be unpatented by the United States. When the collection of a tax on such an interest is enforced by sale, the tax deed conveys merely the right of possession, and does not affect any interest of the United States, and the construction of the state statutes, and the conformity thereto of the tax levy and sale, are matters exclusively for the state court to determine, and this Court is without jurisdiction to review its decision. Sections 340, 341 of the laws of Colorado of 1881, taxing interests in unpatented mining claims and makin...
Penn Refining Co., Ltd. Vs. Western N.Y. and PA. R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-27-1908
Penn Refining Co., Ltd. v. Western N.Y. & Pa. R. Co. - 208 U.S. 208 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Penn Refining Co., Ltd. v. Western N.Y. & Pa. R. Co., 208 U.S. 208 (1908) Penn Refining Company, Limited v. Western New York and Pennsylvania Railroad Company No. 27 Argued October 18, 21, 1907 Decided January 27, 1908 208 U.S. 208 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus An order of the Interstate Commerce Commission that carriers not charging for tanks on tank-oil shipments desist from charging for the barrel on barrel shipments or else furnish tank cars to all shippers applying therefor held, in this case, to be equivalent to a holding that the charge for the barrel, is not, in itself, excessive, and therefore, also held that barrel-oil shippers who had not demanded tank cars had not been discriminated against, and were not entitled to reparation for the amounts paid by them on the barrels. It is the duty of a connecting carrier on a joint throug...
Ex Parte Simon
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-20-1908
Ex Parte Simon - 208 U.S. 144 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Ex Parte Simon, 208 U.S. 144 (1908) Ex Parte Simon No. 13, Original Argued January 6, 7, 1908 Decided January 20, 1908 208 U.S. 144 PETITION FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS AND CERTIORARI Syllabus The usual rule is that a prisoner cannot anticipate the regular course of proceedings having for their end to determine whether he shall be held or released by alleging want of jurisdiction and petitioning for a habeas corpus, and the same rule is applicable in the case of one committed for contempt until a small fine shall be paid for disobeying an injunction order of the circuit court and who petitions for a habeas on the ground that the order disobeyed was void because issued in a suit which was coram non judice. Notwithstanding the prohibitive provisions of 720, Rev.Stat., the circuit court of the United States may have jurisdiction of a suit brought by a citizen of one state against citizens of another state to enjoin the ...
Southern Pine Lumber Co. Vs. Ward
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-20-1908
Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. Ward - 208 U.S. 126 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. Ward, 208 U.S. 126 (1908) Southern Pine Lumber Company v. Ward No. 8 Submitted December 17, 1907 Decided January 20, 1908 208 U.S. 126 ERROR TO AND APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF OKLAHOMA Syllabus Although the record was not docketed until more than thirty days after the appeal was allowed, as it was accomplished soon afterwards and meanwhile no motion was made to docket and dismiss under Rule 9, a motion subsequently made was denied. Jurisdiction of this Court attaches upon allowance of the appeal, and proceedings are to be taken here to bring in the representative of an appellee who dies after the acceptance of service of citation. An appellee who has not himself appealed cannot be heard in this Court to assail the judgment below. Nat. Live Stock Bank v. First Nat. Bank, 203 U. S. 296 , 203 U. S. 305 , followed as to when jurisdiction of this Cou...
Houghton Vs. Meyer
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-20-1908
Houghton v. Meyer - 208 U.S. 149 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Houghton v. Meyer, 208 U.S. 149 (1908) Houghton v. Meyer No. 49 Argued November 12, 1907 Decided January 20, 1908 208 U.S. 149 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus While the restraining order authorized by 718, Rev.Stat., is a species of temporary injunction, it is only authorized until a pending motion for a temporary injunction can be disposed of. The undertaking given to obtain a restraining order under 718, Rev.Stat. must be construed in the light of that section, and it necessarily is superseded by an order or decree granting an injunction and thereupon expires by its own limitation, notwithstanding such order or decree may subsequently be reversed. The givers of an undertaking cannot be held for any period not covered thereby on the conjecture that they would have given a new undertaking had one been required. Their liability must be determined on the one actually given. I...
i. M. Darnell and Son Co. Vs. Memphis
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-20-1908
I. M. Darnell & Son Co. v. Memphis - 208 U.S. 113 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court I. M. Darnell & Son Co. v. Memphis, 208 U.S. 113 (1908) I. M. Darnell & Son Co. v. City of Memphis No. 75 Argued December 16, 1907 Decided January 20, 1908 208 U.S. 113 I N ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE Syllabus While a state may tax property which has moved in the channels of interstate commerce after it is at rest within the state and has become commingled with the mass of property therein, it may not discriminate against such property by imposing upon it a burden of taxation greater than that imposed upon similar domestic property. The exemption from taxation in ch. 258 of the acts of Tennessee of 1903 of growing crops and manufactured articles from the produce of the state in the hands of the manufacturer is a discrimination against similar property, the product of the soil of other states, brought into that state, and is therefore a direct burden upon interstate commerc...
Blacklock Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1908
Blacklock v. United States - 208 U.S. 75 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Blacklock v. United States, 208 U.S. 75 (1908) Blacklock v. United States No. 65 Argued December 10, 1907 Decided January 13, 1908 208 U.S. 75 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus A mere recital in an act, whether of fact or of law, is not conclusive unless it be clear that the legislature intended that it be accepted as a fact in the case. Kinkead v. United States, 150 U. S. 433 . The Court of Claims was not precluded by the recitals in the Act of May, 1902, 32 Stat. 207, 243, referring this case to it, from examining into the facts and determining whether the claimant's lien referred to in the act as a prior lien was or was not a prior lien, and basing its decision upon the actual facts found. Section 106 of the Act of July 20, 1868, 15 Stat. 125, 167, providing for an action in equity by the collector of internal revenue to enforce a lien of the United States for unpaid revenue taxes did not super...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »