UNITED STATES

v.

STATE OF IDAHO

Citator

Cited By

• Ex parte Republic of Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (U.S. 1943)
  …rom the district courts, this Court, in the exercise of its discretion, has in appropriate circumstances declined to issue the writ to a district court, but without prejudice to an application to the circuit court of appeals (Ex parte Apex Mfg. Co., 274 U. S. 725; Ex parte Daugherty, 282 U. S. 809; Ex parte Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., 286 U. S. 533), which likewise has power under § 262 of the Judicial Code to issue the writ. McClellan v. Carland, 217 U. S. 268; Adams v. U. S. ex rel. McCann, 317 U. S. 2…
• Ex parte United States, 287 U.S. 241 (U.S. 1932)
  …ere the direct appellate jurisdiction was vested in the circuit court of appeals, this court, in the exercise of its discretion, has declined to issue the writ and relegated the applicant to his remedy in that court. Ex parte Apex Electric Mfg. Co., 274 U. S. 725; Ex parte Daugherty, 282 U. S. 809; Ex parte Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., 286 U. S. 533. The rule deducible from the later decisions, and which we now affirm, is, that this court has full power in its discretion to issue the writ of mandamus to…
• King Mfg. Co. v. City Council of Augusta, 277 U.S. 100 (U.S. 1928)
  …gments of state courts sustaining the validity of municipal ordinances have been reviewed on writ of error in a number of cases. Beery v. Houghton, 273 U. S. 671 (Per Curiam); Ohio ex rel. Clarke v. Deckebach, 274 U. S. 392; Angelo v. Winston-Salem, 274 U. S. 725 (Per Curiam); Bloecher & Schaaf v. Baltimore, 275 U. S. 490 (Per Curiam); Kresge Co. v. Dayton, 275 U. S. 505 (Per Curiam). Compare Natchez v. McNedy, 275 U. S. 502 (Per Ciiriam). But in none of them did [*135] counsel question the jurisdiction…