COURTS. See Admiralty; Federal Employers' Liability Act; Fed-
eral Rules of Civil Procedure, 1-4; Jurisdiction, 1-3; Labor-
Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, 1;
Mandamus; Procedure, 1-7.
CREDITORS. See Bankruptcy Act, 1-3; Escheat.
CRIMINAL LAW. See Civil Rights Act of 1964; Constitutional
Law, III, 1, 3; IV, 1; V, 1-4; VI, 1-2; VII; Procedure, 1, 5;
Public Officers.
CRIMINAL LIBEL. See Constitutional Law, V, 1; Public Officers.
DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. See Bankruptcy Act, 1-3; Escheat.
DEFAMATION. See Constitutional Law, V, 1; Public Officers.
DEFENDANTS. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 1-2;
Mandamus.
DELEGATES. See Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure
Act of 1959, 2.
DISCRETION. See Constitutional Law, V, 3.
DISCRIMINATION. See Civil Rights Act of 1964; Constitutional
Law, I, 1-2; III, 2; IV, 1; V, 3; Interstate Commerce, 1;
Procedure, 3.
DISTRIBUTING AGENT. See Bankruptcy Act, 2.
DUE PROCESS. See Constitutional Law, III; Federal Airport
Act; Interstate Commerce, 1; Jurisdiction, 1; Procedure, 5.
ELECTIONS. See Constitutional Law, IV, 2–3; Jurisdiction, 3;
Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, 1–2;
Procedure, 4, 7.
EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE. See Federal Employers' Lia-
bility Act; Interstate Commerce Commission, 1; Labor;
National Labor Relations Act, 1-3.
ENTRAPMENT. See Constitutional Law, III, 3.
EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS. See Constitutional Law,
IV; Procedure, 4.
Jurisdiction of State to escheat abandoned intangible property.—
Jurisdiction to escheat abandoned intangible personalty lies in the
State of the creditor's last known address on the debtor's books or,
absent such address or an escheat law, in the State of the corporate
debtor's 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. Texas v. New Jersey, p. 674.
EVIDENCE. See Constitutional Law, VI, 2; Federal Employers'
EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES. See Labor.
FEDERAL AIRPORT ACT. See also Jurisdiction, 1.
Airport zoning ordinance-Compensation for taking of airspace.—
The Act does not defeat respondent's right under state law to com-
pensation for the taking of airspace. Jankovich v. Toll Road
Comm'n, p. 487.
FEDERAL CLAIM. See Bankruptcy Act, 2.
FEDERAL EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT.
Employer negligence-State appellate court invading province of
the jury-Where employee was awarded damages by a jury under
the Act, the state appellate court improperly invaded the province
of the jury by holding that the issue of employer negligence should
not have been submitted to the jury and that the trial court erred
in denying employer's motion for a directed verdict. Davis v. Balti-
more & O. R. Co.,
p. 671.
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION. See also Collateral Estoppel;
Interstate Commerce, 2-3.
Jurisdictional scope-Natural Gas Act-Rule-making or adjudica-
tion. The jurisdictional boundaries of the Commission may be
established by adjudication rather than by rule-making. California
v. Lo-Vaca Co., p. 366.
FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD. See Bank Holding Company Act
of 1956.
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. See also Juris-
diction, 2; Mandamus; Service of Process.
1. Rule 35 (a)-Mental and physical examination of defendants.-
Rule 35 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applies to mental
and physical examination of defendants as well as plaintiffs and as so
applied is constitutional and authorized by the Rules Enabling Act.
Schlagenhauf v. Holder, p. 104.
2. Rule 35 (a)-Requirements of "in controversy" and "good
cause."-The requirements of Rule 35 (a) that the condition of the
party sought to be examined be "in controversy" and that "good
cause" be shown for the examination are not met by mere conclusory
allegations of the pleadings, but must be applied with discrimination
by the trial judge. Schlagenhauf v. Holder, p. 104.
3. Rule 45 (e)-Expenses of transporting witnesses-Taxation of
costs. The 100-mile subpoena provision in Rule 45 (e) does not com-
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
pletely bar a district court from taxing as costs expenses of transport-
ing witnesses more than 100 miles, for Rule 54 (d) leaves the district
court discretion to tax such expenses. Farmer v. Arabian American
Oil Co., p. 227.
4. Taxation of costs-Second trial.—It was not error for a district
court judge at the end of the second trial to determine costs for both
trials, as the first judgment and taxation of costs were upset by the
reversal of the trial judgment. Farmer v. Arabian American Oil
Co., p. 227.
FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS. See Civil Rights Act of 1964;
Constitutional Law, VII; Federal Airport Act; Jurisdiction, 1;
Labor; Procedure, 1.
FIFTH AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, III, 2; Inter-
state Commerce, 1.
FINAL JUDGMENT. See Procedure, 6.
FIRST AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, V, 1-4; Public
FLORIDA. See Constitutional Law, IV, 1.
FOREIGN BRANCH BANKS. See Jurisdiction, 2; Service of
Process.
FORFEITURE. See Constitutional Law, II.
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, III, 1,
3; IV, 1-3; Federal Airport Act; Jurisdiction, 1; Procedure,
4-5, 7.
FOURTH AMENDMENT. See Constitutional Law, VI, 1-2;
Procedure, 1.
FRAUD. See Internal Revenue Code, 1-2.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSEMBLY. See Constitutional
Law, V, 1-4; Public Officers.
GEORGIA. See Constitutional Law, I, 1; III, 2; IV, 3; Procedure,
4.
GOVERNMENT CLAIM. See Bankruptcy Act, 2.
HABEAS CORPUS. See Procedure, 1.
HOP-PICKING MACHINES. See Patents.
HOTELS. See Constitutional Law, I, 1; III, 2; Interstate Com-
merce, 1.
IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT OBLIGATION. See Constitu-
tional Law, II.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. See National Labor Relations
INJUNCTIONS. See Jurisdiction, 2; Procedure, 4; Service of
INSOLVENCY. See Bankruptcy Act.
INTANGIBLES. See Escheat.
INTERNAL REVENUE. See Jurisdiction, 2; Service of Process.
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.
1. Fraud Statute of limitations-Summons.-Internal Revenue
Service need not show probable cause to suspect fraud in order to
enforce summons for tax records, either before or after the expira-
tion of statute of limitations, and unless the taxpayer raises a sub-
stantial question of abuse of the court's process, the Service need only
show that the investigation is relevant to a legitimate purpose to
acquire information properly determined to be necessary. United
States v. Powell, p. 48.
2. Summons-Statute of limitations-Fraud.-Internal Revenue
Service need not show probable cause for suspecting fraud in order
to examine taxpayer's records for closed years. Ryan v. United
States, p. 61.
INTERRACIAL COHABITATION. See Constitutional Law, IV, 1.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE. See also Collateral Estoppel; Con-
stitutional Law, I, 1-2; Federal Power Commission; Procedure,
1. Interstate travel-Racial discrimination-Moral wrongs.-The
protection of interstate commerce, which includes interstate move-
ment of persons, is within the regulatory power of Congress whether
or not the transportation is "commercial" and even though Congress
in removing the disruptive effect of racial discrimination was also
legislating against moral wrongs. Atlanta Motel v. United States,
p. 241.
2. Transportation of natural gas-Commingling in pipeline-"Re-
stricted use" contracts.-Actuality of interstate transportation and
resale of substantial portion of natural gas commingled in pipeline.
invokes Federal Power Commission jurisdiction, notwithstanding con-
tracts providing for restricted use of the gas. California v. Lo-Vaca
Co., p. 366.
3. Transportation of natural gas-Sale of commingled gas intra-
state and interstate-Federal Power Commission jurisdiction.—
Where interstate pipeline company commingles gas from several
INTERSTATE COMMERCE-Continued.
sources and uses some intrastate and sells some out of state, the
parties may not avoid Federal Power Commission jurisdiction by
stipulating in their contract that, contrary to actuality of transporta-
tion, all of one supplier's gas will be used intrastate. Federal Power
Comm'n v. Amerada Petroleum Corp., p. 687.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT.
Railroad rates-Class rates-All-commodity rates. Section 1 (6)
of the Act applies to the setting of class rates but not to all-com-
modity railroad rates, although the latter are subject to Interstate
Commerce Commission control under other provisions of the Act.
All States Frgt. v. N. Y., N. H. & H. R. Co., p. 343.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION.
1. Railroad merger-Protection of employees' interests.-Judgment
dismissing employees' complaint to set aside in part Interstate Com-
merce Commission railroad merger orders for failure to protect em-
ployees' interests pursuant to provisions of a collective bargaining
agreement vacated insofar as judgment relates to those provisions,
with instructions to remand case to the Commission for clarification
of orders. Railway Labor Assn. v. U. S., p. 199.
2. Railroad rate reductions-Order not supported by adequate
findings. Interstate Commerce Commission should reconsider its
order canceling certain railroad rate reductions in view of District
Court's determination that the order was not supported by adequate
findings. Arrow Co. v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co., p. 642.
INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE. See Constitutional Law, III, 2;
Interstate Commerce, 1.
JONES ACT. See Admiralty, 1-3; Procedure, 6.
JUDGES. See Constitutional Law, V, 1; Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, 2-4; Public Officers.
JUDGMENTS. See Procedure, 6.
JURISDICTION. See also Bank Holding Company Act of 1956;
Collateral Estoppel; Escheat; Federal Airport Act; Federal
Power Commission; Interstate Commerce, 2-3; Labor-Manage-
ment Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, 1; Procedure, 3;
Service of Process.
1. Supreme Court-State court decision based on state and federal
grounds-Not reviewable.-This Court has no jurisdiction to review
state court judgment based on independent and adequate state
grounds, even though it also rested on similar federal grounds.
Jankovich v. Toll Road Comm'n, p. 487.
|