For property taken for public use, see "Emi- | plied to a combination of newspaper managers. nent Domain," § 2.
For use of patent, see "United States," & 2. Of army and navy officers, see "Army and Na- vy."
Of United States officers, see "United States," § 1.
Aikens v. State of Wisconsin, 3; Huegin v. Same, Id.; Hoyt v. Same, Id.
A conspiracy to obtain school lands from the quish them to the United States under Act states of California and Oregon, and to relin- June 4, 1897, c. 2, 30 Stat. 36 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1541], in exchange for other lands, held within Rev. St. U. S. § 5440 [U. S. Comp.
Unfair competition, see "Trade-Marks and St. 1901, p. 3676], forbidding_conspiracies to Trade-Names," § 1.
COMPOSITIONS WITH CREDITORS.
See "Compromise and Settlement."
defraud the United States.-Hyde v. Shine, 760; Dimond v. Same, 766.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
Cases arising under Constitution of United States as conferring jurisdiction on federal court, see "Courts," § 3.
Liability of national bank, see "Banks and Constitutionality of act prohibiting peonage, see Banking," § 1.
COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT.
See "Accord and Satisfaction"; "Release."
An agreement that payment in United States currency should extinguish a larger amount due under contract estimated in Porto Rican cur- rency held binding.-City of San Juan v. St. John's Gas Co., 108.
Constitutionality of act relating to number of jurors, see "Territories."
Constitutionality of acts relating to pilots, see "Pilots."
Constitutionality of statute exempting proceeds of life insurance, see "Insurance," § 4. Constitutionality of statute requiring vaccina- tion, see "Health," § 1. Validity of local assessment, see "Municipal Corporations," § 1.
Validity of ordinance relating to erection of gas works, see "Municipal Corporations," § 2.
Provisions relating to particular subjects.
Of finding of Land Department, see "Public See "Commerce," § 1; "Eminent Domain," § 1; Lands," § 2.
"Extradition," § 1; "Taxation," § 2. Public indebtedness, see "States," § 2.
§ 1. Construction, operation, and en- forcement of constitutional pro-
Objection that vested rights of railroad com- pany under the Northern Pacific land grant are interfered with by provisions of Act July 1, 1898, c. 546, 30 Stat. 597, 620, settling disputes arising out of conflicting rulings of Land De- partment, held waived.-Humbird v. Avery, 123. Meaning of state statute, as indicated by ex- clusion of evidence on the ground of its incom-
Of sentence of court martial, see "Army and pentency under it, held conclusive on the federal Navy."
Supreme Court in determining the question of the validity of the statute.-Jacobson v. Com- monwealth of Massachusetts, 358.
Spirit of federal Constitution cannot be in- voked, apart from its language, to invalidate a state statute.-Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 358.
§ 2. Distribution of governmental pow- ers and functions.
Supplementary regulations as to location of mining claims, prescribed by state in addition to congressional regulations, held not invalid.- Butte City Water Co. v. Baker, 211.
§ 3. Personal, civil, and political rights. Freedom to contract, protected by Const. U. S. Amend. 14, held not unduly abridged by Kan- sas anti-trust law of March 8, 1897, relating to combination of grain buyers.-Smiley v. State of Kansas, 289.
An adult held not deprived of liberty secured by Const. U. S. Amend. 14, by enforcement against him of a compulsory vaccination law. Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
Personal liberty secured by Const. U. S. Amend. 14, held not infringed by Rev. Laws
Mass. c. 75, § 137, authorizing compulsory vac- cination.-Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Mass- achusetts, 358.
The limitation of employment in bakeries to sixty hours a week and ten hours a day, under Laws N. Y. 1897, c. 415, art. 8, § 110, held an arbitrary interference with the freedom to contract guarantied by Const. U. S. Amend 14. -Lochner v. People of State of New York, 539. § 4. Obligation of contracts.
Municipal corporation cannot invoke protec- tion of contract clause of federal Constitution against abrogation by Laws Mass. 1898, c. 578, with consent of street railway company, of pro visions of contract between that company and the_municipality_as to paving streets.-City of Worcester v. Worcester Consol. St. Ry. Co., 327.
Obligation of contract of employment by non- resident meat packing house of a resident man- aging agent held not impaired by imposition on him under Act Ga. Dec. 21, 1900, of license tax of $200.-Kehrer v. Stewart, 403.
The imposition on a gas company of cost of changes of location in pipes under city streets by construction of municipal drainage system, under Act La. July 9, 1896, held not to impair any contract rights.-New Orleans Gaslight Co. v. Drainage Commission of New Orleans, 471.
Special franchise tax imposed by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, held not to impair obligation of contracts by which right to construct street railways in the city of New York was granted. -People of State of New York v. State Board of Tax Com'rs, 705, 715.
§ 5. Retrospective and ex post facto laws.
Substitution, on conviction of murder in the first degree, under Act N. D. March 9, 1903. of close confinement, after judgment and before execution of death penalty, in the penitentiary; in lieu of confinement in the county jail, held not to render the statute ex post facto, as applied to a person convicted before its pas- sage.-Rooney v. State of North Dakota, 264. § 6. Equal protection of laws.
The equal protection of the laws held not de- nied a retail tobacco dealer by the tax imposed on cigarette selling by Code Iowa, § 5007.- Cook v. Marshall County, 233.
Exemption of subsurface street railway in New York from operation of special franchise tax authorized by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, held not to make statute invalid as' denying owners of surface railways equal protection of the laws.-People of State of New York v. State Board of Tax Com'rs, 705, 715.
Reduction for annual payments in the nature of a tax covered by existing agreements made by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, from amount of special franchise tax, held not to render the statute invalid as denying equal protection of the laws or depriving the companies of their of State of New York v. State Board of Tax property without due process of law.-People Com'rs, 705, 715.
Discrimination against Chinese persons in ad- ministration of municipal ordinance making it barred room or visit such room or house held unlawful to exhibit gaming implements in a not sufficiently shown to enable the Supreme Court of the United States to declare such or- dinance void.-Ah Sin v. Wittman, 756. § 7. Due process of law.
Assessing by the frontage rule, entire cost of a street extension held not so manifestly unfair to owner whose property lies beyond the point where the improvement ends as to render assess- ment void.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44.
Due process of law held not denied by a reas- sessment for cost of a street extension, as in- cluding work which could not be included in a local assessment.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44.
Including in a reassessment for the cost of a street extension a charge for certain work not authorized by the ordinance held not a denial of due process of law to a property owner affect- ed thereby.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44..
ings by which judgment is taken in state court Due process of law held wanting in proceed- in favor of the holder, if plaintiff in confession on warrant of attorney authorizing confession before commencement of the suit had ceased to own the note.-National Exch. Bank v. Wiley, 70.
Suffcient provision for notice and hearing to constitute due process of law held afforded the owner of real property made personally liable, and his property impressed with a lien, under Code Iowa, § 5007, for tax imposed on cigarette selling on the premises, by sections 2441, 2442.
Lack of any exception in favor of adults as unfit for vaccination held not to render invalid Rev. Laws Mass. c. 75, § 137, relating to com--Hodge v. Muscatine County, 237. pulsory vaccination, though an exception is made in favor of children in like condition by section 139.-Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 358.
A foreign corporation, whose license to do business in Texas is sought to be forfeited un- der the anti-trust laws of the state, held not de- nied equal protection of the laws, where dis- criminatory features of the prior anti-trust law have been removed by Act Tex. May 25, 1899. -National Cotton Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383.
Equal protection of laws held not denied man- aging agent of nonresident meat packing house by imposition of license tax under Act Ga. Dec. 21, 1900.-Kehrer v. Stewart, 403.
Street railway company held not denied equal protection of the laws by a municipal tax on its business of $100 per mile of its trackage, be- cause steam railroad company is not subject to tax. Savannah, T. & I. of H. Ry. v. City of Savannah, 690.
process of law by Code Iowa, § 5007, making An owner of real property is not denied due tax imposed on business of cigarette selling a lien on the property where the business is_car- ried on.-Hodge v. Muscatine County, 237.
Due process of law does not require that as to a person actually selling cigarettes notice be given of the assessment of the taxes imposed by Code Iowa, § 5007.-Hodge v. Muscatine Coun- ty, 237.
The construction by the Iowa Supreme Court of the annual charge imposed by Code Iowa, § 5007, on cigarette dealers and on the property and the owner thereof as a tax on the traffic and not a penalty, is not so clearly erroneous as to justify the federal Supreme Court in adopting a different construction on writ of er- ror as a denial of due process of law.-Hodge V. Muscatine County, 237.
Due process of law held not denied a nonresi- dent stockholder in a domestic corporation by imposition, under Code Pub. Gen. Laws Md.
art. 81, of personal liability for taxes on his stock. Corry v. City of Baltimore, 297.
Lack of any provision for notice to nonresi- dent stockholder in domestic corporation of as- sessment of taxes on his stock held not to ren- der invalid, as denying due process of law, so much of Code Pub. Gen. Laws Md. art. 81, as imposes on him as a condition of such owner- ship a personal liability for taxes on stock.- Corry v. City of Baltimore, 297.
Due process of law is not denied a foreign in- surance company by distraining its personal property under authority of Rev. St. Ohio, § 1095, to satisfy personal taxes.-Scottish Union & National Ins. Co. v. Bowland, 345; Bowland v. Scottish Union & National Ins. Co., Id.
Property of a foreign corporation manufac- turing products of cotton seed is not taken without due process of law by the Texas anti- trust act, on forfeiture of its license to do busi- ness for violating those laws.-National Cotton Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383.
A state police officer can arrest, on requisi- tion of a foreign consul, a seaman charged with insubordination, under treaty provision.- Dallemagne v. Moisan, 422.
Constitutional guaranty of due process of law held not infringed by Act Aug. 18, 1894, c. 301, § 1, 28 Stat. 372, 390 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1303], making decision of department on right of Chinese to enter United States conclu- sive on federal courts, in absence of any abuse of authority.-United States v. Ju Toy, 644.
Including in the appraisement of capital stock of a domestic corporation for taxation, under Laws Pa. 1891, p. 229, the value of coal mined within the state, but situated in other states, held to deprive the corporation of its property without due process of law.-Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 669.
Street railway company held not denied due process of law in valuation of a franchise un- der Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, on theory that it was ascertained by speculation.-People of State of New York v. State Board of Tax Com'rs, 713, 715.
Due process of law clause of fourteenth amendment held not to wholly deprive a state of its power to confer jurisdiction on its courts to administer assets of absentees.-Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.
Impairing obligation, see "Constitutional Law," $4. Interference with freedom to contract, see "Constitutional Law," § 3.
Operation and effect of customs or usages, see "Customs and Usages."
Contracts of particular classes of parties. Connecting carriers, see "Carriers," § 1.
Contracts relating to particular subjects. See "Interest"; "Patents," § 1.
Carrying mails, see "Post Office," § 1. Public water supply, see "Waters and Water Courses." To monopolize trade, see "Monopolies," § 2. Transportation of goods, see "Carriers," § 1. Use of patent, see "United States," § 2.
Particular classes of express contracts. See "Indemnity"; "Insurance"; "Sales." Stipulations in actions, see "Stipulations."
Particular classes of implied contracts. See "Contribution."
Particular modes of discharging contracts. See "Accord and Satisfaction"; "Compromise
and Settlement"; "Release."
§ 1. Requisites and validity.
The rule that property' delivered under an il- legal contract cannot be recovered back prevents the original stockholders in two competing in- terstate railroads from reclaiming specific shares of stock, which they delivered to the stockhold- ing corporation pursuant to a combination sub- sequently adjudged illegal.-Harriman v. North- ern Securities Co., 493.
Parties to a transaction adjudged to violate Anti-Trust Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200], held not exempt from the doctrine in pari delicto.-Harriman v. Northern Securities Co., 493.
Contracts with telegraph companies, by which Chicago Board of Trade limits the communica- tion of quotations of prices on sales for future delivery which it might have refrained from communicating to any one, held not a monop- oly or contract in restraint of trade, either un- der Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200], or at common law. Grain & Stock Co., 637; L. A. Kinsey Co. v. Board of Trade of City of Chicago, Id. § 2. Construction and operation.
Fixing period of person's absence from his last domicile which would be sufficient underBoard of Trade of City of Chicago v. Christie, Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, to authorize adminis- tration of his property, held not so unreasonable as not to be due process of law.-Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.
Safeguards for protection of property of ab- sentee in case of his return afforded by Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, providing a special proceeding for administration of assets of absentees, held to satisfy requirement of due process of law. -Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.
Notice by publication of special proceedings under Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, for adminis- tration of assets of absentees, held due pro- cess of law. Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.
A municipal ordinance making it unlawful to visit a barred room where gambling imple- ments are exhibited held not to deprive any one of his liberty without due process of law. -Ah Sin v. Wittman, 756.
References in contract for street lighting to sums to be paid in currency held not to over- throw evidence that current foreign money was to be the medium of payment.-City of San Juan v. St. John's Gas Co., 108.
Terminal company whose negligence in fail- ing to discover a defective brake on a car deliv- ered to it has been established by a competent tribunal cannot enforce contribution from the railroad company for the latter's neglect of duty. -Union Stock Yards Co. of Omaha v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 226.
Due process of law as regards taxation, see "Constitutional Law," § 7.
Due process of law as to taxation, see "Con- stitutional Law," § 7.
Effect of illegality of contract, see "Contracts," § 1.
Forfeiture of license of foreign corporation as denial of equal protection of laws, see "Con- stitutional Law," § 6.
Jurisdiction of federal courts, see "Courts," § 4. Liability of stockholders in national bank, see "Banks and Banking," § 1.
Restraining enforcement of taxes, see "Injunc- tion," § 1.
Right of action by receiver, see "Receivers," § 1.
Taxation, see "Taxation," §§ 2, 3.
Particular classes of corporations.
See "Exchanges"; "Municipal Corporations." Insurance companies, see "Insurance," § 1. Telegraph and telephone companies, see "Tele- graphs and Telephones," § 1. Water companies, see "Waters and Water Courses," 1.
1. Members and stockholders. Stockholders' liability in an Ohio corporation cannot be enforced outside of that state, under Const. Ohio, art. 13, § 3, where an action in Ohio courts is alone contemplated by Rev. St. Ohio 1880, § 3260, as amended in 1894.—Mid- dletown Nat. Bank v. Toledo, A. A. & N. M. Ry. Co., 462.
Laches and acquiescence held to defeat any right of the original stockholders in two com- peting interstate railway companies to rescind the contract under which they delivered their stock to a corporation formed in pursuance of a combination, under which it would acquire a controlling interest in the capital stock of the railway companies in exchange for its own cap- ital stock. Harriman v. Northern Securities Co., 493.
A clear preponderance of proof held essential to establish that the parties to a transaction by which a corporation acquired, in exchange for its own capital stock, a controlling interest in two competing interstate railways, agreed that the new corporation should hold such stock as trustee, where the transaction on its face was one of sale. Harriman v. Northern Securities Co., 493.
3. Foreign corporations.
Ownership of land in New Mexico by railroad organized and existing under Act Cong. March 3, 1897, c. 374, 26 Stat. 622, held insufficient, un- der Comp. Laws N. M. 1897, § 450, to authorize service on its president, passing through the ter- ritory on a railroad train, in a personal action in which a judgment may be levied on the lands to satisfy the judgment.-Territory of New Mexico v. Baker, 375.
Service of summons on a director of a for- eign corporation casually within the state held to confer no jurisdiction on the federal court, where the corporation is doing no business and has no property in the state.-Remington v. Central Pac. R. Co., 577.
Local correspondents of foreign corporation, furnishing them with market quotations, held agents for purpose of service of process. Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. Ham- mond Elevator Co., 740.
Service of subpoena on resident treasurer of foreign corporation held insufficient to give ju- risdiction over such corporation. Kendall v. American Automatic Loom Co., 768.
In federal courts, see "Courts," § 5.
See "Municipal Corporations."
Adoption by United States courts of state laws as rules of decision, see "Courts," § 6.
Conclusiveness of finding of Land Department, see "Public Lands," § 2. Courts-martial, see "Army and Navy." Jurisdiction over foreign insurance company, see "Insurance," § 1.
Removal of action from state court to United States court, see "Removal of Causes." Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error." Jurisdiction of particular actions, proceedings. or subjects.
Criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," § 1. Determination of right to property of bankrupt, see "Bankruptcy," § 2.
Special jurisdictions and proceedings therein. Appellate jurisdiction, see "Bankruptcy," § 4. § 1. Establishment, organization, and procedure in general.
Federal Supreme Court held not bound on question of jurisdiction by a prior case in which jurisdiction was entertained without sug- gestion as to the want of it.-New v. Territory of Oklahoma, 68.
Tex. May 25, 1899, as removing discriminatory Construction given by state courts to Act features of prior anti-trust laws, held conclu- sive on federal Supreme Court.-National Cot- ton Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383.
§ 2. United States courts - Jurisdiction and powers in general. Inequality in valuation for taxation of a franchise held not ground for injunction in the federal court, when not made on such a differ- ent scale of value as to deny the equal protec- tion of the law guarantied by Const. U. S. Amend. 14.-Coulter v. Louisville & N. R. Co. 342.
Value of matter in dispute, in suit to set aside judgment of probate court as fraudulently ob- tained, is the aggregate amount of claims whose allowance was procured in furtherance of an unlawful combination. McDaniel v. Traylor,
taken by the master.-Steigleder v. McQuesten, | sued in the federal courts as a citizen of that state, after compliance with statutory require- ments.-W. L. Wells Co. v. Gastonia Cotton Mfg. Co., 640.
Jurisdiction dependent on na- ture of subject-matter. The formal repudiation by a city of its con- tract with a waterworks company cannot give rise to a suit under the federal Constitution, of which a federal court can take jurisdiction without reference to citizenship.-City of Daw- son v. Columbia Ave. Sav. Fund, Safe Deposit, Title & Trust Co., 420.
Assertion that, because real estate cannot be devised by nuncupative will, attempt of probate court to exert authority over such real estate by admitting such will to probate deprived heirs of property without due process of law, held not to give federal Circuit Court jurisdic- tion to construe the will.-O'Callaghan v. O'Brien, 727.
Contention that state court, in admitting a nuncupative will to probate without giving stat- utory notice to next of kin, violated due pro- cess of law clause of Constitution, held so lacking in merit as to afford no basis for ju- risdiction of federal Circuit Court in a suit to set aside the probate.-O'Callaghan v. O'Brien, 727. § 4.
Jurisdiction dependent on cit- izenship, residence, or character of parties, Allegation in complaint held not sufficiently to aver that defendant corporation is an Ohio cor- poration, within the rule imputing to members of a corporation_citizenship in the state creating it. Thomas v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State University, 24.
Jurisdiction of a federal Circuit Court on the ground of diverse citizenship over suit between a citizen of Michigan and the board of trus- tees of the Ohio State University will sufficient- ly appear, without bringing the persons consti- tuting the board before the court as defendants. -Thomas v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State University, 24.
Federal Circuit Court, whose action was in- voked by the Republic of Colombia to set aside an award against it in arbitration proceedings, has power to award interest from the date fixed for payment.-Ex parte Republic of Colombia, 107.
That ultimate interest in corporate defend- ant may be the same as that of complaining stockholders does not, in determining jurisdic- tion of federal court invoked for diverse citi- zenship, require such corporation to be grouped on the side of complainants.-Doctor v. Har- rington, 355.
Presumption that stockholders of corporation are citizens of the state which created it held not to preclude them from asserting their ac- tual citizenship to sustain jurisdiction in fed- eral court to suit by them as stockholders.- Doctor v. Harrington, 355.
A federal Circuit Court has no jurisdiction, because of diversity of citizenship, of a suit against a city by the mortgagee of a water- works company to enforce the city's contract with that company, where there is no diver- sity of citizenship between the city and the company.-City of Dawson v. Columbia Ave. Sav. Fund, Safe Deposit, Title & Trust Co.,
Incorporators under a charter declaring that they have been created a body politic and cor- porate become a corporation under the laws of Mississippi, for the purpose of suing and being
Procedure, and adoption of practice of state courts.
A Circuit Court of Appeals cannot, without statutory authority, permit prosecution in forma pauperis of a writ of error sued out of that court.-Bradford v. Southern Ry. Co., 55.
Right to prosecute writ of error from a Cir- cuit Court of Appeals without security for costs held not given by Act July 20, 1892, c. 209, 27 Stat. 252 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 706]. -Bradford v. Southern Ry. Co., 55.
§ 6. State laws as rules of decision. State tax levy on land conveyed by the Unit- ed States to a corporation for dry dock pur- poses, with the reserved right in grantor to the use of the dock, held to create a lien on the company's interest alone.-Baltimore Ship- building & Dry Dock Co. v. City of Baltimore,
The meaning of a state statute, as determined by the highest court of the state, concludes the federal Supreme Court on writ of error.- Smiley v. State of Kansas, 289.
Whether chattel mortgage covering after-ac- quired property is valid held a local question, on which decisions of state courts will be followed by the federal Supreme Court.-Thompson v. Fairbanks, 306.
Decision of California Supreme Court that the repeal by Act Cal. March 23, 1901, of au- thority of municipal bodies to license for reve- nue abates a suit to recover a license tax, held under the decisions of that court a revenue measure, to be so construed in federal courts.- Flanigan v. Sierra County, 314; Wheeler v. Plumas County, 316.
Validity under state laws of an ordinance of county supervisors is, as to the federal courts, governed by decisions of the highest courts of the state.-Flanigan v. Sierra County, 314; Wheeler v. Plumas County, 316.
Whether relation of physician and patient ex- cluded the former's testimony, under Code Civ. Proc. N. Y. §§ 834, 836, involves question of state statute, on which decisions of highest state court will be accepted by the Supreme Court of the United States.-Supreme Lodge, K. P., v. Meyer, 754.
§ 7. -Supreme court in general.
The jurisdiction of a federal Circuit Court over a controversy between citizens of different states, claiming under grants from different states, held to depend entirely on diversity of citizenship, within rule making decrees of Cir- cuit Court of Appeals final in such cases.- Stevenson v. Fain, 6.
Review in Supreme Court of final judgments of the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico held not necessarily confined by Act April 12, 1900, c. 191, § 35, 31 Stat. 77, 85, to cases therein described.-Ama- do v. United States, 13.
The claim in a written motion in arrest of judgment that the indictment did not set forth offense under the statutes of the United States held too indefinite to give the Supreme Court jurisdiction of a writ of error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico, under Act April 12, 1900, c. 191, § 35, 31 Stat. 77, 85, as a case where the Con- stitution of the United States or an act of
« AnteriorContinuar » |