HOLWIG
v.
HIATT ; HUMES V. BLAIR, JUDGE; EX PARTE FRANK S. FOWLER; AND EX PARTE THOMAS M. WOFFORD
HOLWIG
HIATT ; HUMES V. BLAIR, JUDGE; EX PARTE FRANK S. FOWLER; AND EX PARTE THOMAS M. WOFFORD
317 U.S. 593
Supreme Court of the United States (1942)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Charleston Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Alderson, 324 U.S. 182 (U.S. 1945)…e National Bank v. State Tax Comm’n, 296 U. S. 538; Irvine v. Spaeth, 314 U. S. 575; Memphis Gas Co. v. Beeler, 315 U. S. 649, 650; Commercial Credit Co. v. O’Brien, 323 U. S. 665; see Ex parte Williams, 277 U. S. 267, 272; cf. Reeves v. Williamson, 317 U. S. 593. Where it appears from the opinion of the state court of last resort that a state statute was drawn in question, as repugnant to the Constitution, and that the decision of the court was in. favor- of its validity, we have jurisdiction on appeal. Fo…
-
Ex parte Abernathy, 320 U.S. 219 (U.S. 1943)…ionary, id. 584; Bowen v. Johnston, 306 U. S. 19, 27, and this Court does not, save in exceptional circumstances, exercise it in cases where an adequate remedy may be had in a lower federal court, Ex parte Current, 314 U. S. 578; Ex parte Spaulding, 317 U. S. 593; Ex parte Hawk, 318 U. S. 746, or, if the relief sought is from the judgment of a state court, where the petitioner has not exhausted his remedies in the state courts, Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103, 115; Ex parte Botwinski, 314 U. S. 586; Ex part…