Us Supreme Court Court October 1956 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.
Gibson Vs. Phillips Petroleum Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-22-1956
Gibson v. Phillips Petroleum Co. - 352 U.S. 874 (1956) U.S. Supreme Court Gibson v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 352 U.S. 874 (1956) Gibson v. Phillips Petroleum Company No. 339. Decided October 22, 1956 352 U.S. 874 ON PETITION FOR CERTIORARI Rehearing Denied Dec. 3, 1956. See 352 U.S. 937. PER CURIAM. The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated, 232 F.2d 13, and the judgment of the District Court is reinstated. MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER, whom MR. JUSTICE HARLAN joins, dissenting. This is an ordinary suit for damages for injuries claimed to have been caused by defendant's fault. Doubtless hundreds upon hundreds of such suits are constantly brought in the state courts of Texas. This suit is brought in a federal court because the plaintiff is a citizen of Texas and the defendant corporation is, in the eyes of the law, a citizen of Delaware. The federal court in a case like this is deemed to be a state court of Texas, * and the...
Mesarosh Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Oct-10-1956
Mesarosh v. United States - 352 U.S. 1 (1956) U.S. Supreme Court Mesarosh v. United States, 352 U.S. 1 (1956) Mesarosh v. United States No. 20 Argued and decided October 10, 1956 Opinions delivered November 5, 1956 352 U.S. 1 ON MOTION TO REMAND Syllabus In a Federal District Court, petitioners were convicted of conspiring to violate the Smith Act by advocating the overthrow of the Government of the United States by force and violence. The Court of Appeals affirmed. While a review was pending in this Court, the Solicitor General moved that the case be remanded to the District Court for a determination as to the credibility of the testimony of one of the government witnesses at the trial. He stated that the Government believes that the testimony of this witness at the trial "was entirely truthful and credible," but that, on the basis of information in its possession, the Government now has serious reason to doubt the truthfulness of testimony given by the same witness in othe...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›