List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 278
Encyclopedia
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court
cases from volume 278 of the United States Reports
:
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
cases from volume 278 of the United States Reports
United States Reports
The United States Reports are the official record of the rulings, orders, case tables, and other proceedings of the Supreme Court of the United States. Opinions of the court in each case, prepended with a headnote prepared by the Reporter of Decisions, and any concurring or dissenting opinions are...
:
- Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. Haydel, 278 U.S. 1 (1928)
- Johnson v. Haydel, 278 U.S. 16 (1928)
- Maney v. United States, 278 U.S. 17 (1928)
- Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. Board of Pub. Util. Comm'rs, 278 U.S. 24 (1928)
- Boston Sand and Gravel Co. v. United States, 278 U.S. 41 (1929)
- United States v. Cambridge Loan & Building Co., 278 U.S. 55 (1928)
- United States v. Lenson, 278 U.S. 60 (1928)
- New York ex rel. Bryant v. Zimmerman, 278 U.S. 63 (1928)
- Charles Warner Co. v. Independent Pier Co., 278 U.S. 85 (1928)
- Herkness v. Irion, 278 U.S. 92 (1928)
- Hunt v. United States, 278 U.S. 96 (1928)
- Ex parte Public Nat. Bank of N. Y., 278 U.S. 101 (1928)
- Louis K. Liggett Co. v. Baldridge, 278 U.S. 105 (1928)
- Washington ex rel. Seattle Title Trust Co. v. Roberge, 278 U.S. 116 (1928)
- Jordan v. Tashiro, 278 U.S. 123 (1928)
- Pacific S. S. Co. v. Peterson, 278 U.S. 130 (1928)
- Unadilla Valley R. Co. v. Caldine, 278 U.S. 139 (1928)
- Northern Coal & Dock Co. v. Strand, 278 U.S. 142 (1928)
- Security Mortgage Co. v. Powers, 278 U.S. 149 (1928)
- Weil v. Neary, 278 U.S. 160 (1929)
- Lash's Products Co. v. United States, 278 U.S. 175 (1929)
- Commercial Casualty Ins. Co. v. Consolidated Stone Co., 278 U.S. 177 (1929)
- Russell v. United States, 278 U.S. 181 (1929)
- Slaker v. O'Connor, 278 U.S. 188 (1929)
- Roe v. Kansas ex rel. Smith, 278 U.S. 191 (1929)
- State Highway Comm'n of Wyo. v. Utah Constr. Co., 278 U.S. 194 (1929)
- West v. Standard Oil Co., 278 U.S. 200 (1929)
- Cogen v. United States, 278 U.S. 221 (1929)
- Lawrence v. St. Louis-San Francisco R. Co., 278 U.S. 228 (1929)
- Williams v. Standard Oil Co. of La., 278 U.S. 235 (1929)
- George Van Camp & Sons Co. v. American Can Co., 278 U.S. 245 (1929)
- United States v. Williams, 278 U.S. 255 (1929)
- Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co. v. Mars, 278 U.S. 258 (1929)
- International Shoe Co. v. Pinkus, 278 U.S. 261 (1929)
- United States v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 278 U.S. 269 (1929)
- Botany Worsted Mills v. United States, 278 U.S. 282 (1929)
- United States v. Carver, 278 U.S. 294 (1929)
- United Fuel Gas Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of Ky., 278 U.S. 300 (1929)
- United Fuel Gas Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n of W. Va., 278 U.S. 322 (1929)
- Chase Nat. Bank v. United States, 278 U.S. 327 (1929)
- Reinecke v. Northern Trust Co., 278 U.S. 339 (1929)
- Gleason v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 278 U.S. 349 (1929)
- Oriel v. Russell, 278 U.S. 358 (1929)
- Wisconsin v. IllinoisWisconsin v. IllinoisWisconsin v. Illinois, also referred to as the Chicago Sanitary District Case, is an opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the equitable power of the United States can be utilized to impose positive action on one state in a situation in which nonaction would result in...
, 278 U.S. 367 (1929) - Exchange Trust Co. v. Drainage Dist. No. 7, Poinsett Cty., 278 U.S. 421 (1929)
- United States v. Commonwealth & Dominion Line, Ltd., 278 U.S. 427 (1929)
- Larson v. South Dakota, 278 U.S. 429 (1929)
- Arlington Hotel Co. v. Fant, 278 U.S. 439 (1929)
- Nashville, C. & St. L. R. Co. v. White, 278 U.S. 456 (1929)
- Cudahy Packing Co. v. Hinkle, 278 U.S. 460 (1929)
- Taft v. BowersTaft v. BowersTaft v. Bowers, 278 U.S. 470 , was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court dealing with taxation of a gift of shares of stock under the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The recipient of shares of stock, Elizabeth Taft, argued that she could not be taxed on the...
, 278 U.S. 470 (1929) - Salomon v. State Tax Comm'n of N. Y., 278 U.S. 484 (1929)
- Michigan Central R. Co. v. Mix, 278 U.S. 492 (1929)
- Western & Atlantic R. Co. v. Hughes, 278 U.S. 496 (1929)
- Hart Refineries v. Harmon, 278 U.S. 499 (1929)
- Great Northern R. Co. v. Minnesota, 278 U.S. 503 (1929)
- Rice & Adams Corp. v. Lathrop, 278 U.S. 509 (1929)
- Frost v. Corporation Comm'n of Okla., 278 U.S. 515 (1929)