Us Supreme Court Court May 1912 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.
Chicago and Alton R. Co. Vs. Kirby
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Chicago & Alton R. Co. v. Kirby - 225 U.S. 155 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Chicago & Alton R. Co. v. Kirby, 225 U.S. 155 (1912) Chicago & Alton Railroad Company v. Kirby No. 226 Argued April 25, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 155 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Syllabus The implied agreement of a common carrier is to carry safely and deliver at destination within a proper time; evidence of diligence and no unreasonable delay excuses. A carrier who agrees to expedite assumes a more burdensome liability, and can exact a higher rate, than where mere carrier's liability exists. An interstate carrier can assume an extra liability for expediting, provided it makes and publishes a rate therefor and opens it to all. To agree with a particular shipper to expedite a shipment at regular rates, where no rate has been published for special expediting, is a discrimination and as such a violation of the Elkins Act of February 19, 1903, 32 Stat. 847, c. 708, and re...
Sexton Vs. Kessler and Co., Ltd.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Sexton v. Kessler & Co., Ltd. - 225 U.S. 90 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Sexton v. Kessler & Co., Ltd., 225 U.S. 90 (1912) Sexton v. Kessler & Company, Limited No. 92 Argued December 12, 13, 1911 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 90 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus The conduct of businessmen, acting without lawyers and in good faith, attempting to create a personal security for an actual debt should be fairly construed as actually effecting what the parties meant, and so held in this case that an escrow of securities made by a banking firm in New York to secure its drafts upon a foreign bank amounted to a lien on the securities to be preferred to the claim of the trustee in bankruptcy, notwithstanding that the New York firm retained physical power over the securities, as agent for the foreign house, and had the right to substitute other securities for those withdrawn and sold. Under the decisions of this Court and the courts of New York, ...
Anderson Vs. Pacific Coast Steamship Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Anderson v. Pacific Coast Steamship Co. - 225 U.S. 187 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Anderson v. Pacific Coast Steamship Co., 225 U.S. 187 (1912) Anderson v. Pacific Coast Steamship Company No. 641, 642 Argued February 21, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 187 CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus When the federal Constitution was adopted, each state had its own pilotage regulations. State pilotage laws are regulations of commerce, but they fall within that class of powers which may be exercised by the states until Congress shall see fit to act. The provisions of former federal statutes relating to pilotage were incorporated in 4401 and 4444, Rev.Stat., which are still in force. In adopting the Revised Statutes, change of arrangement from earlier Page 225 U. S. 188 statutes will not be regarded as altering their scope and purpose; an intent of Congress to change the effect of prior law will not be presumed unless clearly expressed. ...
Chase Vs. Wetzlar
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Chase v. Wetzlar - 225 U.S. 79 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Chase v. Wetzlar, 225 U.S. 79 (1912) Chase v. Wetzlar No. 1045 Submitted April 22, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 79 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus Where the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court is dependent, under 8 of the Act of 1875, upon property affected being within the jurisdiction, the defendants not being therein, the fact that the bill was dismissed because complainants failed to prove the existence of any property within the jurisdiction does not affect the right of a direct appeal to this Court under 5 of the Act of 1891. The burden of proof as to the existence of property to be affected by the decree within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court in order to give it jurisdiction under 8 of the Act of March 3, 1875, c. 137, 18 Stat. 472, is on the complainant. While averments of some jurisdictional facts may prima facie be taken as tr...
National Bank Vs. Herkimer County Bank
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
National Bank v. Herkimer County Bank - 225 U.S. 178 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court National Bank v. Herkimer County Bank, 225 U.S. 178 (1912) National Bank of Newport, New York v. National Herkimer County Bank of Little Falls No. 172 Argued February 28, 29, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 178 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus To constitute a preference under the Bankruptcy Act, it is not necessary that the transfer be made directly to the creditor; it may be made to another for his benefit, and, if preferential, circuity of arrangement will not avail to save it. Unless, however, the creditor takes by virtue of a disposition by the insolvent debtor of his property for the benefit of the creditor so that the estate is diminished, the creditor cannot be charged with receiving a preference. Where the endorser of the bankrupt's note, which is under discount at a bank and secured by the endorser's own collateral, pays the note, thereby rec...
Stalker Vs. Oregon Short Line R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Stalker v. Oregon Short Line R. Co. - 225 U.S. 142 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Stalker v. Oregon Short Line R. Co., 225 U.S. 142 (1912) Stalker v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Company No. 225 Argued April 24, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 142 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Syllabus The Act of March 3, 1875, 18 Stat. 482, c. 152, granting rights of way and station grounds for railroads through the public lands was a grant in praesenti of lands to be thereafter identified. Railroad Co. v. Jones, 177 U. S. 125 . The right of way becomes definitely located by actual construction, which is unmistakable evidence and notice of appropriation. A selection and location of station grounds under the Act of March 3, 1875, filed with he Secretary of the Interior after construction of the Page 225 U. S. 143 railroad, is subject to approval by the Secretary, but the approval relates back to the date of filing, and thereupon the selection becomes superior to the ...
Railroad Commission of Ohio Vs. Worthington
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Railroad Commission of Ohio v. Worthington - 225 U.S. 101 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Railroad Commission of Ohio v. Worthington, 225 U.S. 101 (1912) Railroad Commission of Ohio v. Worthington Nos. 505, 776 Argued April 15, 16, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 101 APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT AND THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO, EASTERN DIVISION AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In cases of intervention in foreclosure suits, where jurisdiction depends upon diverse citizenship, jurisdiction of the intervening petition is determined by that of the original case, but petitions in original proceedings to enforce rights and protect the exercise of the jurisdiction of the court take their jurisdiction from that of the original case. St. Louis, K. C. & C. R. Co. v. Wabash R. Co., 217 U. S. 247 . Where the petition of the receiver, appointed in...
Jordan Vs. Massachusetts
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Jordan v. Massachusetts - 225 U.S. 167 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Jordan v. Massachusetts, 225 U.S. 167 (1912) Jordan v. Massachusetts No. 519 Argued April 16, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 167 ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus Subject to the requirement of due process of law, the states are under no restriction as to their methods of procedure in the administration of public justice. Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S. 78 , 211 U. S. 111 . Due process of law implies a tribunal both impartial and mentally competent to afford a hearing, but due process is not denied when a competent state court refuses to set aside a verdict because the sanity of one of the jurors which has been questioned is established, after an inquiry in accordance with the established procedure of the state, only by a preponderance of evidence. In this case, held that one convicted by a jury and sentenced to death was not denied due process of law becaus...
United States Vs. Colorado Anthracite Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
United States v. Colorado Anthracite Co. - 225 U.S. 219 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Colorado Anthracite Co., 225 U.S. 219 (1912) United States v. Colorado Anthracite Company No. 227 Argued April 25, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 219 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus An assign within the meaning of 2 of the Act of June 16, 1880, 21 Stat. 287, c. 244, is one who becomes invested with the entryman's right in the land through the voluntary act of the latter. While a mere quitclaim deed does not pass after-acquired title, the equitable title of one who was also trustee to acquire the title for the grantee will pass by such a deed. Equity usually looks upon that as done which ought to have been done. The Act of June 16, 1880, proceeds upon equitable principles, and should be administered accordingly. A remedial statute such as 2 of the Act of June 16, 1880, should be interpreted with appropriate regard to the spirit which prompted it, and that act i...
Southern Ry. Co. Vs. Burlington Lumber Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1912
Southern Ry. Co. v. Burlington Lumber Co. - 225 U.S. 99 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Southern Ry. Co. v. Burlington Lumber Co., 225 U.S. 99 (1912) Southern Railway Company v. Burlington Lumber Company No. 236 Argued May 3, 1912 Decided May 27, 1912 225 U.S. 99 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Syllabus Decided on authority of Southern Railway Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 424 , and Southern Railway Company v. Reid & Beam, 222 U. S. 444 . The facts are stated in the opinion. Page 225 U. S. 100 MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an action to recover penalties under a statute of North Carolina for refusal to receive goods for shipment. As the statute is the same that was held bad, so far as it concerns commerce among the states, in Southern R. Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 424 , and Southern R. Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 444 , a short statement will be enough. On January 26, 1907, the Burlington Lumber Company tendered to the railw...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »