Us Supreme Court Court February 1965 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.
Texas Vs. New Jersey
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
Texas v. New Jersey - 379 U.S. 674 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. New Jersey, 379 U.S. 674 (1965) Texas v. New Jersey No. 13, Original Argued November 9, 1964 Decided February 1, 1965 379 U.S. 674 ON BILL OF COMPLAINT Syllabus Jurisdiction to escheat abandoned intangible personal property lies in the State of the creditor's last known address on the debtor's books and records or, absent such address or an escheat law, in the State of corporate domicile -- but subject to later escheat to the former State if it proves such an address to be within its borders and provides for escheat of such property. Pp. 379 U. S. 680 -683. Page 379 U. S. 675 MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court. Invoking this Court's original jurisdiction under Art. III, 2, of the Constitution, [ Footnote 1 ] Texas brought this action against New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the Sun Oil Company for an injunction and declaration of rights to settle a controversy as to which State has j...
Hearne Vs. Smylie
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
HEARNE v. SMYLIE - 379 U.S. 692 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court HEARNE v. SMYLIE, 379 U.S. 692 (1965) 379 U.S. 692 HEARNE ET AL. v. SMYLIE, GOVERNOR OF IDAHO, ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO. No. 617. Decided February 1, 1965. Cause continued. Herman J. McDevitt for appellants. Allan G. Shepard, Attorney General of Idaho, and M. Allyn Dingel, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for Williams et al., appellees. PER CURIAM. This cause is continued on the docket until the Court Conference of May 21, 1965, before which time the parties are asked to advise the Court by supplemental briefs as to the progress made in reapportioning the Idaho Legislature. Page 379 U.S. 692, 693 ...
Fpc Vs. Amerada Petroleum Corp.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
FPC v. Amerada Petroleum Corp. - 379 U.S. 687 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court FPC v. Amerada Petroleum Corp., 379 U.S. 687 (1965) Federal Power Commission v. Amerada Petroleum Corp. No. 585 Decided February 1, 1965 379 U.S. 687 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. Where a supplier sells natural gas to an interstate pipeline company which commingles it with gas from other sources and uses some of the mixture intrastate, but sells a substantial portion thereof in interstate Commerce, the parties may not avoid the jurisdiction of the Federal Power Commission by stipulating in their contract that, contrary to the actuality of pipeline transportation, all the supplier's gas sold under the contract will be used intrastate. California v. Lo-Vaca Gathering Co., ante, p. 379 U. S. 366 , followed. P. 379 U. S. 690 . 2. The doctrine of collateral estoppel is not applicable here, since only the scope of future regul...
Blow Vs. North Carolina
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
Blow v. North Carolina - 379 U.S. 684 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Blow v. North Carolina, 379 U.S. 684 (1965) Blow v. North Carolina No. 387 Decided February 1, 1965 379 U.S. 684 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA Syllabus Negroes denied entry to a restaurant serving whites only were arrested after refusing to leave the property. They were convicted of violating a North Carolina statute making it a crime to enter upon the lands of another without a license after being forbidden to do so, and their convictions were affirmed by the State Supreme Court. The restaurant and the adjoining motel, which are under the same management, are on an interstate highway, and are extensively advertised. Held: Since the restaurant serves or offers to serve interstate travelers, it is a "place of public accommodation" within 201 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and these convictions, although for conduct prior to the enactment thereof, are abated by pass...
Hughes Vs. Wmca, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
Hughes v. WMCA, Inc. - 379 U.S. 694 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Hughes v. WMCA, Inc., 379 U.S. 694 (1965) Hughes v. WMCA, Inc. No. 623 Decided February 1, 1965 * 379 U.S. 694 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Affirmed. PER CURIAM. The motions to affirm are granted, and the judgments are affirmed. MR. JUSTICE WHITE and MR JUSTICE GOLDBERG join in the affirmance in No. 623, since it is their understanding that it in no way interferes with the power of the District Court, in the light of circumstances as they may develop, to vacate or otherwise modify its order requiring an election in the fall of 1965. * Together with No. 718, Davis, Secretary, State Board of Elections, et al. v. Mann, et al., on appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, whom MR. JUSTICE CLARK joins, dissenting. Both of these cases, today affirmed summarily by the Court, raise serious problems co...
Forty-fourth General Assembly Vs. Lucas
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
Forty-fourth General Assembly v. Lucas - 379 U.S. 693 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Forty-fourth General Assembly v. Lucas, 379 U.S. 693 (1965) Forty-fourth General Assembly of Colorado v. Lucas No. 661 Decided February 1, 1965 379 U.S. 693 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judgment with respect to federal questions affirmed; judgment with respect to other questions vacated, and cause remanded. Reported below: 232 F.Supp. 797. PER CURIAM. Insofar as the judgment of the District Court decides federal questions, it is affirmed. Insofar as the judgment decides other questions, it is vacated, and the cause is remanded for further consideration in light of the supervening decision of the Colorado Supreme Court in White v. Anderson, ___ Colo. ___, 394 P.2d 333 (1964). MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, MR. JUSTICE STEWART, and MR. JUSTICE GOLDBERG, concurring. It is our understanding that the Court's disposition of this case leaves it ...
Texas Vs. New Jersey
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-01-1965
Texas v. New Jersey - 380 U.S. 518 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. New Jersey, 380 U.S. 518 (1965) Texas v. New Jersey No. 13, Original Decided February 1, 1965 Decree entered April 26, 1965 380 U.S. 518 Decree carrying into effect this Court's opinion of February 1, 1965, 379 U. S. 379 U.S. 674. FINAL DECREE This cause, having come on to be heard on the Report of the Special Master heretofore appointed by the Court, and the exceptions filed thereto, and having been argued by counsel for the several parties, and this Court having stated its conclusions in its opinion announced on February 1, 1965, 379 U. S. 674 , and having considered the positions of the respective parties as to the terms of the decree, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Each item of property in question in this case as to which a last-known address of the person entitled thereto is shown on the books and records of defendant Sun Oil Company is subject to escheat or custodial taking...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›