Us Supreme Court Court March 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.
Bosque Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Bosque v. United States - 209 U.S. 91 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Bosque v. United States, 209 U.S. 91 (1908) Bosque v. United States No. 147 Submitted January 2, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 91 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS Syllabus Under the Treaty of Paris of 1898, between the United States and Spain, a Spanish resident of the Philippine Islands, who left there in May, 1899, without making any declaration of intention to preserve his allegiance to Spain and remained away until after the expiration of eighteen months after the ratification of the treaty, continued to be a Spaniard, and did not, even though he intended to return, become a citizen of the islands under the new sovereignty, and therefore is not eligible to admission to practice at the bar under the rules established by the military and civil authorities of the Philippine Islands. The laws applicable to other foreigners referred to in Article XIX of the treaty referred not to Span...
Asbell Vs. Kansas
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Asbell v. Kansas - 209 U.S. 251 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Asbell v. Kansas, 209 U.S. 251 (1908) Asbell v. Kansas No. 166 Submitted March 6, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 251 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS Syllabus While the state may not legislate for the direct control of interstate commerce, a proper police regulation which does not conflict with congressional legislation on the subject involved is not necessarily unconstitutional because it may have an indirect effect upon interstate commerce. Until Congress acts on the subject, a state may, in the exercise of its police power, enact laws for the inspection of cattle coming from other states. Reid v. Colorado, 187 U. S. 137 . Congress has not enacted any legislation destroying the right of a state to provide for the inspection of cattle and prohibiting the bringing within its borders of diseased cattle not inspected and passed as healthy either by the proper state or national officials. A ...
Ex Parte Young
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Ex Parte Young - 209 U.S. 123 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) Ex Parte Young No. 10, Original Argued December 2, 3, 1907 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 123 PETITION FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORUS AND CERTIORARI Syllabus While this court will not take jurisdiction if it should not, it must take jurisdiction if it should. It cannot, as the legislature may, avoid meeting a measure because it desires so to do. In this case, a suit by a stockholder against a corporation to enjoin the directors and officers from complying with the provisions of a State statute, alleged to be unconstitutional, was properly brought within Equity Rule 94 of this court. An order of the Circuit Court committing one for contempt for violation of a decree entered in a suit of which it did not have jurisdiction is unlawful, and, in such case, upon proper application, this court will discharge the person so held. Page 209 U. S. 124 Although the determination of whether a railw...
icc Vs. Chicago Great Western Ry. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
ICC v. Chicago Great Western Ry. Co. - 209 U.S. 108 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court ICC v. Chicago Great Western Ry. Co., 209 U.S. 108 (1908) Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago Great Western Railway Company No. 73 Argued April 16, 17,1907 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 108 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Syllabus Railroads are the private property of their owners, and while the public has the power to prescribe rules for securing faithful and efficient service and equality between shippers and communities, the public is in no proper sense a general manager. The companies may, subject to change of rates provided for in the Interstate Commerce Act, contract with shippers for single and successive transportation, and, in fixing their own rates, may take into account competition, provided it is genuine and not a mere pretense. There is no presumption of wrong arising from a change of rate made by a carrier. The presum...
Hutchins Vs. Munn
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Hutchins v. Munn - 209 U.S. 246 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Hutchins v. Munn, 209 U.S. 246 (1908) Hutchins v. Munn No. 163 Argued March 10, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 246 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus The measure of protection to be given by the undertaking required on issuing a restraining order under 718, Rev.Stat., is to make good the injuries inflicted upon a party observing the order until it is dissolved, and such undertaking inures to the benefit of a defendant suffering injuries irrespective of the exact time when that party has knowledge of the pendency of the action or appears therein; nor is this protection denied because the only defendant sustaining injuries is a woman and the undertaking is to make good "to the defendant all damages by him suffered." Findings of an auditor assessing damage on an undertaking should not be set aside by the court unless there has been an error of law or a conclusion of fact unwarr...
Hallowell Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Hallowell v. United States - 209 U.S. 101 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Hallowell v. United States, 209 U.S. 101 (1908) Hallowell v. United States No 175 Argued March 12, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 101 CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The authority given by 6 of the Judiciary Act of March 3, 1891, 26 Stat. 826, to the circuit court of appeals to certify propositions of law to this Court cannot be used for the purpose of sending to this Court the whole case for its consideration and decision. A certificate which does not set forth the propositions of law, clearly stated, which may be answered without reference to all the facts, but which sets forth mixed questions of law and fact requiring this Court to construe acts of Congress, and, in the light of all the testimony, to determine what should be the judgment of the lower court, is defective, and must be dismissed. C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Williams, 205 U. S. 444 , 205 U....
General Oil Co. Vs. Crain
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
General Oil Co. v. Crain - 209 U.S. 211 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court General Oil Co. v. Crain, 209 U.S. 211 (1908) General Oil Company v. Crain No. 128 Argued January 23, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 211 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE Syllabus Where complainant is entitled to equitable relief against the enforcement by state officers of an unconstitutional state statute, the judgment of the state court dismissing the bill for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the suit is one against the state gives effect to the statute, denies complainant a constitutional right, and is reviewable by this Court under 709, Rev.Stat. A suit against state officers to enjoin them from enforcing a state statute which violates complainant's constitutional rights either by its terms, or by Page 209 U. S. 212 the manner of its enforcement is not a suit against the state within the meaning of the statute of 1873 of Tennessee denying jurisdiction to the courts of ...
Thomas Vs. Iowa
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Thomas v. Iowa - 209 U.S. 258 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Thomas v. Iowa, 209 U.S. 258 (1908) Thomas v. Iowa No. 533 Argued February 26, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 258 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IOWA Syllabus In order to give this Court jurisdiction under 709, Rev.Stat., to review the judgment of a state court, the federal question must be distinctly raised in the state court, and a mere claim, which amounts to no more than a vague and inferential suggestion that a right under the Constitution of the United States had been denied, is not sufficient -- and so held as to an exception taken as to certain parts of the charge to the jury because in effect they deprived the accused of his liberty without due process of law. Page 209 U. S. 259 It is too late to raise the federal question for the first time in the petition for writ of error from this Court or in the assignment of errors here. Writ of error to review 105 N.W. 1130 dismissed. The facts ...
Hunter Vs. Wood
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Hunter v. Wood - 209 U.S. 205 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Hunter v. Wood, 209 U.S. 205 (1908) Hunter v. Wood No. 474 Argued December 18, 19, 1907 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 205 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Syllabus Where the Circuit Court of the United States has, in an action within its jurisdiction, issued an interlocutory injunction against the enforcement of a state railroad rate statute, and in such order directed the conditions under which tickets hall be old at rate higher than those prescribed under the state statute, a ticket agent who sells tickets in conformity with such condition, and who is proceeded against, convicted, and sentenced therefor by the state authorities, is in custody for an act done pursuant to an order, process or decree of a court or judge of the United States within the meaning of 753, Rev.Stat., and may apply for a writ of habeas corpus to the United States circuit judge who...
Dotson Vs. Milliken
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-23-1908
Dotson v. Milliken - 209 U.S. 237 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Dotson v. Milliken, 209 U.S. 237 (1908) Dotson v. Milliken No. 48 Argued March 4, 5, 1908 Decided March 23, 1908 209 U.S. 237 ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus A broker employed to sell land subject to a requirement of the purchaser which the vendor declares will be complied with is entitled to his commissions if the sale falls through solely because the vendor's representations are inaccurate. The fact that the particular portion of a tract of land for which a broker finds a purchaser in accordance with the vendor's offer cannot be identified does not defeat the broker's claim for commissions if the sale falls through entirely for other reasons for which the vendor was exclusively responsible. 27 App.D.C. 500 affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion. MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an action for a commission of $2.50 an acre on 10,000 acres ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »