Page 4 of about 108 results (0.50 sec)
Ex parte Leaf Tobacco Board of Trade
222 US 578, 32 S. Ct. 833, 56 L. Ed. 323 - Supreme Court, 1911 - Google Scholar
3. The merely general nature and character of the interest which the movers allege they have
in the papers here filed is not in any event of such a character as to authorize them in this proceeding …
in the papers here filed is not in any event of such a character as to authorize them in this proceeding …
Williams v. Walsh
222 US 415, 32 S. Ct. 137, 56 L. Ed. 253 - Supreme Court, 1912 - Google Scholar
"It shall be unlawful for any individual, firm or corporation to sell, offer for sale or deliver for use
at any coal mine or mines in the State of Kansas, black powder in any manner except in original …
at any coal mine or mines in the State of Kansas, black powder in any manner except in original …
United States v. McMullen
222 US 460, 32 S. Ct. 128, 56 L. Ed. 269 - Supreme Court, 1912 - Google Scholar
This is a suit upon a contract for dredging and a bond made part of the contract, both executed
by the New York Dredging Company as principal and by the defendants in error as sureties …
by the New York Dredging Company as principal and by the defendants in error as sureties …
Red" C" Oil Co. v. North Carolina
222 US 380, 32 S. Ct. 152, 56 L. Ed. 240 - Supreme Court, 1912 - Google Scholar
In disposing of the contention just stated we are not at liberty to travel outside of the record and
take judicial notice of the operation of the act since the transcript of record was filed in this …
take judicial notice of the operation of the act since the transcript of record was filed in this …
Gandia v. Pettingill
222 US 452, 32 S. Ct. 127, 56 L. Ed. 267 - Supreme Court, 1912 - Google Scholar
However this may be, what we have said is enough to show that the mind of the jury was not
directed to what was the point of the case. We do not see how, making reasonable allowance …
directed to what was the point of the case. We do not see how, making reasonable allowance …
Union Pacific R. Co. v. Updike Grain Co.
222 US 215, 32 S. Ct. 39, 56 L. Ed. 171 - Supreme Court, 1911 - Google Scholar
As the Peavey elevators were located alongside the tracks of the Union Pacific, these rules did
not affect their right to recover for elevation service. But, as the elevators of the defendants in …
not affect their right to recover for elevation service. But, as the elevators of the defendants in …
Finley v. California
222 US 28, 56 L. Ed. 75, 32 S. Ct. 13 - Supreme Court, 1911 - Google Scholar
31 Plaintiff in error was indicted under this section, tried, found guilty and the death penalty
imposed. To the judgment of the Supreme Court of the State affirming the sentence against him …
imposed. To the judgment of the Supreme Court of the State affirming the sentence against him …
United States v. Stever
222 US 167, 32 S. Ct. 51, 56 L. Ed. 145 - Supreme Court, 1911 - Google Scholar
This is a writ of error to review a judgment quashing an indictment as not stating an offense triable
in the Western District of Kentucky. The indictment contained two counts. The first is drawn to …
in the Western District of Kentucky. The indictment contained two counts. The first is drawn to …
Chicago Junction R. Co. v. King
222 US 222, 56 L. Ed. 173, 32 S. Ct. 79 - Supreme Court, 1911 - Google Scholar
This action to recover for personal injuries begun in a 223 state court, was removed to a Circuit
Court and there decided for the plaintiff. To obtain a reversal of a judgment affirming, the case …
Court and there decided for the plaintiff. To obtain a reversal of a judgment affirming, the case …
Tefft, Weller & Co. v. Munsuri
222 US 114, 32 S. Ct. 67, 56 L. Ed. 118 - Supreme Court, 1911 - Google Scholar
In 1907, the commercial firm of "Successores de Jose Hernaiz" was adjudicated an involuntary
bankrupt. Tefft, Weller & Co. and those who are here conjointly appellants with that firm presented …
bankrupt. Tefft, Weller & Co. and those who are here conjointly appellants with that firm presented …