FARMERS' LOAN AND TRUST COMPANY ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
CITY OF SIOUX FALLS ET AL.
FARMERS' LOAN AND TRUST COMPANY ET AL., APPELLANTS,
CITY OF SIOUX FALLS ET AL.
199 U.S. 601
Supreme Court of the United States (1905)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Arbuckle v. Blackburn, 191 U. S. 405; Newburyport Water Company v. Newburyport, 193 U. S. 561; Underground Railroad v. New York, 193 U. S. 416; Skaneateles Water Works Company v. Skaneateles, 184 U. S. 354; McCain v. Des Moines, 174 U. S. 168. Petition for writ of certiorari denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Razete v. United States, 199 F.2d 44 (6th Cir. 1952)…bribery cases and other cases construing statutes which expressly require a specific intent. United States v. Staats, 8 How. 41, 12 L.Ed, 979; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 23 L.Ed. 588; United States v. Green, D.C., 136 F. 618, affirmed 199 U.S. 601, 26 S.Ct. 748, 50 L.Ed. 328; Cohen v. United States, 6 Cir., 294 F. 488; Evans v. United States, 153 U.S. 584, 14 S.Ct. 934, 38 L.Ed. 830. In bribery the specific intent to influence official action is required by the statute and must be alleged an…
-
United States Ex rel. Silberstein v. Mathues (E.D. Pa. 1926)…e relators as defendants named therein. While the indictment is prima facie evidence of existence of probable cause in removal proceeding's under Comp. Stat. § 1674 (Beavers v. Henkel, 194 U. S. 73, 24 S. Ct. 605, 48 L. Edi 882; Green v. MacDougall, 199 U. S. 601, 26 S. Ct. 748, 50 L. Ed. 328; United States v. Campbell [D. C.] 179 F. 762), it is not conclusive, and, if doubt is raised in any material aspect of the charge, it should be supported by proof aliunde (In re Richter [D. C.] 100 E. 295). [2] The co…
-
United States v. Motlow (M.D. Tenn. 1926)…which the defendant is arrested. In other words, the removal is made a judicial rather than a mere ministerial act.” The case of United States v. Green (D. C.) 136 F. 618, opinion by District Judge Ray, which was affirmed by a per curiam opinion in 199 U. S. 601, 26 S. Ct. 748, 50 L. Ed. 328, is illuminating upon the subject, and is ample authority for the position I take in this case. Judge Ray, in discussing the evidence, on page 625, makes the following statement: “ * * * Standing alone and unsupported…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561 (U.S. 1904)
- Arbuckle v. Blackburn, 191 U.S. 405 (U.S. 1903)
- McCAIN v. Des Moines, 174 U.S. 168 (U.S. 1899)
- Skaneateles Water Works Co. v. Skaneateles, 184 U.S. 354 (U.S. 1902)
- The Underground R.R. of the City of N.Y. v. The City of N.Y., 193 U.S. 416 (U.S. 1904)