Us Supreme Court Court October 1925 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.
American Railway Express Co. Vs. Daniel
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-26-1925
American Railway Express Co. v Daniel - 269 U.S. 40 (1925) U.S. Supreme Court American Railway Express Co. v Daniel, 269 U.S. 40 (1925) American Railway Express Company v Daniel No. 53 Argued October 16, 1925 Decided October 26, 1925 269 U.S. 40 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA Syllabus 1. Where the tariff schedules of an express company governing interstate shipments offer a lower rate for goods below a specified value and a higher rate for goods more valuable, a stipulation in an express receipt fixing the lower value in consideration of the lower rate binds the shipper, although both his agent and the carriers, in making the shipment, were unaware of the fact that the value was higher, and the latter knew the former to be thus ignorant. P. 269 U. S. 41 . 2. The sender is bound to know the relation established by the carrier's schedules between values and rates, and in an action to recover the value of the goods, it is error to exclude the schedu...
Druggan Vs. Anderson
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-19-1925
Druggan v. Anderson - 269 U.S. 36 (1925) U.S. Supreme Court Druggan v. Anderson, 269 U.S. 36 (1925) Druggan v. Anderson No. 415 Argued October 5, 6, 1925 Decided October 19, 1925 269 U.S. 36 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Syllabus 1. Although, by the terms of the Eighteenth Amendment, the prohibition thereby decreed did not go into force until one year from the ratification (January 16, 1919) of the Article, the amendment itself became effective as a law upon its ratification, and empowered Congress thereupon to legislate in anticipation for the enforcement of the prohibition when the year should expire, without awaiting that event. P. 269 U. S. 38 . 2. A preliminary injunction issued under 22 of Title II of the Prohibition Act, without the notice required by Equity Rule 73 and the Act of October 15, 1914, is not void. P. 269 U. S. 40 . Affirmed. Appeal from an order of the district court dismissing a petiti...
Agnello Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-12-1925
Agnello v. United States - 269 U.S. 20 (1925) U.S. Supreme Court Agnello v. United States, 269 U.S. 20 (1925) Agnello v. United States No. 6 Argued April 23, 1925 Decided October 12, 1925 269 U.S. 20 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. The right without a search warrant contemporaneously to search persons lawfully arrested while committing crime and to search the place where the arrest is made in order to find and seize things connected with the crime as its fruits or as the means by which it was committed, as well as weapons and other things to effect an escape from custody, is not to be doubted. P. 269 U. S. 30 . 2. But this right, which is incidental to the arrest, cannot extend to the search of a man's dwelling, several blocks distant from the place of his arrest, after the offense has been committed and while he is in custody elsewhere. Carroll v. United States, 267 U. S. 132 , distinguished. Id. 3. So held assuming t...
Patterson Vs. Louisville and Nashville R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-12-1925
Patterson v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co. - 269 U.S. 1 (1925) U.S. Supreme Court Patterson v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 269 U.S. 1 (1925) Patterson v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company No. 221 Argued April 23-24, 1925 Decided October 12, 1925 269 U.S. 1 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. 1. The power given the Interstate Commerce Commission by 1 of the Act to Regulate Commerce, upon special application to prescribe the extent to which a carrier might be relieved from the operation of that section, containing the "long and short haul" clause, extended also to the "aggregate of intermediates" clause when that was added to the section by amendment of June 18, 1910. P. 269 U. S. 9 . 2. Under the second proviso of 4, a through rate, exceeding the aggregate of intermediates, if in effect on June 18, 1910, and then lawful, remained so, provided an application to suspend the operation of the section was duly made and was either allowed by t...
United States Ex Rel. Kennedy Vs. Tyler
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-12-1925
United States ex Rel. Kennedy v. Tyler - 269 U.S. 13 (1925) U.S. Supreme Court United States ex Rel. Kennedy v. Tyler, 269 U.S. 13 (1925) United States ex Rel. Kennedy v. Tyler No. 125 Argued April 21, 22, 1925 Decided October 12, 1925 269 U.S. 13 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus 1. The power of a district court to inquire by habeas corpus into the cause of the detention of a person held in custody by the authority of a state court in alleged violation of the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States is to be exerted in the exercise of a sound discretion, and the due and orderly administration of justice in a state court is not to be thus interfered with save in rare cases where exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency are shown to exist. P. 269 U. S. 17 . 2. Lack of ability to bear the expense of proceedings for relators' protection in the state courts or to furnish bonds required on appeal ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›