| Case name |
Citation |
Summary
|- |
Beginning of active duty of Chief Justice Melville Weston Fuller, October 8, 1888 |
>
| Kidd v. Pearson Kidd v. Pearson, 128 U.S. 1 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a distinction between manufacturing and commerce meant that an Iowa law which prohibited the manufacture of alcohol was not unconstitutional in that it did not conflict with the power of the US...
|
| Scope of the Commerce Clause The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution . The clause states that the United States Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the states, and with the Native American tribes...
|
| Dent v. West Virginia Dent v. West Virginia, , was an important United States Supreme Court case involving the reputable practice of physicians and state laws in the late nineteenth century.-The Case:...
|
| state licensing of doctors |
| Botiller v. Dominguez Botiller v. Dominguez, 130 U.S. 238 , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court dealing with the validity of Spanish or Mexican land grants in the Mexican Cession, the region of the present day southwestern United States that was ceded to the U.S...
|
| validity of SpanishSpain , officially the Kingdom of Spain , is a country located in southwestern Europe on the Iberian Peninsula. [The Spanish constitution does not establish any official denomination of the country, even though España , Estado español and Nación española are used interchangeably...]
and MexicanThe United Mexican States , commonly known as Mexico , is a federal constitutional republic in North America. It is bordered on the north by the United States; on the south and west by the Pacific Ocean; on the southeast by Guatemala, Belize, and the Caribbean Sea; and on the east by the Gulf of...
land grantA land grant is a gift of real estate - land or privileges - made by a government or other authority as a reward for services to an individual, especially as rewards for military service...
s within the Mexican CessionThe Mexican Cession of 1848 is a historical name in the United States for the region of the present day southwestern United States that Mexico ceded to the U.S. in 1848, excluding the areas east of the Rio Grande, which had been claimed by the Republic of Texas, though the Texas Annexation...
|
| Davis v. Beason Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 , was a United States Supreme Court case affirming, by a 9-0 vote, that courts of the United States had jurisdiction to hear charges related to polygamy that is part of a religious belief, despite the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States...
|
| United States federal courts The United States federal courts comprises the Judiciary Branch of government organized under the Constitution and laws of the federal government of the United States...
have jurisdiction to hear charges related to polygamyThe term polygamy is used in related ways in social anthropology, sociobiology, sociology, as well as in popular speech. Polygamy can be defined as any "form of marriage in which a person [has] more than one spouse."In social anthropology, polygamy is the practice of marriage to more than one...
even though it be part of a religious belief |
| Hans v. Louisiana Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 , was a decision of the United States Supreme Court determining that the Eleventh Amendment prohibits the citizen of a U.S. state to sue that state in a federal court.-Facts:...
|
| sovereign immunity of statesA U.S. state is any one of 50 federated states of the United States of America that share sovereignty with the federal government . Because of this shared sovereignty, an American is a citizen both of the federal entity and of his or her state of domicile...
, interpreting the Eleventh Amendment |
| Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad v. Minnesota |
| states and railway fees |
| In re Neagle In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 , was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined the question of whether the Attorney General of the United States had authority to appoint U.S. Marshals as bodyguards to Supreme Court Justices.-Facts:U.S...
|
| authority of the U.S. Attorney GeneralThe United States Attorney General is the head of the United States Department of Justice concerned with legal affairs and is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States government. The Attorney General is considered to be the chief lawyer of the U.S. government...
to appoint U.S. Marshals as bodyguards to Supreme Court Justices |
| Mormon Church v. United States |
| upheld revocation of Mormon Church charter and confiscation of church property |
| In re Ross In re Ross or Ross v. McIntyre, , was a United States Supreme Court case decided on May 21, 1891. It dealt with the application of US law to foreign sailors on US flagged ships while in another country....
|
| application of U.S. law to foreign sailors on U.S. flagged ships while in another country |
| Holy Trinity Church v. United States Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S. 457 , was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding an employment contract between The Church of the Holy Trinity, New York and an English preacher.- 1885 Act :...
|
| contracts with foreign citizens, religion |
| Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois, , was a United States Supreme Court decision.A dispute over the title of lands occupied by the Illinois Central Railroad Company's tracks, stations, piers, & other constructions along the Chicago lake front...
|
| railroad land dispute, public trust doctrine The public trust doctrine is the principle that certain resources are preserved for public use, and that the government is required to maintain it for the public's reasonable use.-Origins:...
|
Nix v. HeddenNix v. Hedden, , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court addressed whether a tomato was classified as a fruit or a vegetable under the Tariff Act of March 3, 1883, which required a tax to be paid on imported vegetables, but not fruit. The case was filed as an action by John Nix, John W....
|
| status of the tomatoThe tomato is a herbaceous, usually sprawling plant in the Solanaceae or nightshade family that is typically cultivated for the purpose of harvesting its fruit for human consumption...
as fruit or vegetable under Tariff Act of 1883 |
Schillinger v. United StatesSchillinger v. United States, , is an 1894 decision of the United States Supreme Court, holding that a suit for patent infringement cannot be entertained against the United States, because patent infringement is a tort and the United States has not waived sovereign immunity for intentional...
|
| sovereign immunity Sovereign immunity, or crown immunity, is a type of immunity that in common law jurisdictions traces its origins from early English law. Generally speaking it is the doctrine that the sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution; hence the...
forbids suit against the Federal government for patent infringementPatent infringement is the commission of a prohibited act with respect to a patented invention without permission from the patent holder. Permission may typically be granted in the form of a licence. The definition of patent infringement may vary by jurisdiction, but it typically includes using or...
|
| United States v. E. C. Knight Co. United States v. E. C. Knight Co., 156 U.S. 1 , also known as the "Sugar Trust Case,'" was a United States Supreme Court case that limited the government's power to control monopolies...
|
| antitrustUnited States antitrust law is the body of laws that prohibits anti-competitive behavior and unfair business practices. Antitrust laws are designed to encourage competition in the marketplace....
action; “Sugar Trust Case” |
| Sparf v. United States Sparf v. United States, 156 U.S. 51 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that federal judges were not required to inform jurors of their inherent ability to judge the law in a case. The decision asserted that the court could mislead jurors and inform them that they...
|
| jury instructions Jury instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors should follow when the jury is deciding a civil or criminal case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the judge, who usually reads them aloud to the jury...
|
| Coffin v. United States Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 , was an appellate case before the United States Supreme Court in 1895 which established the presumption of innocence of persons accused of crimes....
|
| the presumption of innocenceThe presumption of innocence being considered innocent until proven guilty is a legal right that the accused in criminal trials has in many modern countries...
|
| In re Debs In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 , was a United States Supreme Court decision handed down concerning Eugene V. Debs and labor unions. Debs, president of the American Railway Union, had been involved in the Pullman Strike earlier in 1894 and challenged the federal injunction ordering the strikers back to...
|
| strikes and interstate commerce |
| Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, , aff'd on reh'g, , was an important case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends, and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 were, in effect, direct taxes, and were...
|
| income tax The federal government of the United States imposes a progressive tax on the taxable income of individuals, partnerships, companies, corporations, trusts, decedents' estates, and certain bankruptcy estates. Some state and municipal governments also impose income taxes. The first Federal income tax...
and tariffs |
| Hilton v. Guyot Hilton v. Guyot, , was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court in which the court described the factors to be used when considering the application of comity.- Opinion of the Court :...
|
| doctrine of comity In law, comity specifically refers to legal reciprocity—the principle that one jurisdiction will extend certain courtesies to other nations , particularly by recognizing the validity and effect of their executive, legislative, and judicial acts...
|
| Geer v. Connecticut Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U.S. 519 , was a United States Supreme Court decision, which dealt with the transportation of wild fowl over state lines. Geer held that the states owned the wild animals within their borders and could strictly regulate their management and harvest...
|
| statesA U.S. state is any one of 50 federated states of the United States of America that share sovereignty with the federal government . Because of this shared sovereignty, an American is a citizen both of the federal entity and of his or her state of domicile...
owned the wild animals within their borders and can strictly regulate their management and harvest |
| Talton v. Mayes Talton v. Mayes, 163 U.S. 376, was a 1896 United States Supreme Court case, in which the court decided that the individual rights protections, which limit federal, and later, state governments, do not apply to tribal government. It reaffirmed earlier decisions, such as the 1831 Cherokee Nation v...
|
| individual rights in U.S. Constitution not applicable to tribal governments |
| Plessy v. Ferguson Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 , is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in the jurisprudence of the United States, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation even in public accommodations , under the doctrine of "separate but equal".The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1...
|
| segregation; "separate but equal" |
| United States v. Ball United States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held considered the effect of an acquittal or conviction in a previous trial based on a defective indictment...
|
| double jeopardyDouble jeopardy is a procedural defense that forbids a defendant from being tried twice for the same crime on the same set of facts...
|
| United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 166 U.S. 290 , was a United States Supreme Court case holding that the Sherman Act applied to the railroad industry, even though the U.S...
|
| railroads and rate fixing |
| Interstate Commerce Commission v. Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railway Co. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railway Co., 167 U.S. 479 , was an important early U.S. Supreme Court case in the development of American administrative law.-Legal principle:...
|
| powers of an administrative agency |
| Barrett v. United States Barrett v. United States, 169 U.S. 218 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that South Carolina had never effectively been subdivided into separate judicial districts...
|
| South CarolinaSouth Carolina is a U.S. state that borders Georgia to the south and North Carolina to the north. Originally part of the Province of Carolina, the Province of South Carolina was one of the 13 colonies that declared independence from the British Crown during the American Revolution. The colony was...
had not been subdivided into separate federal judicial districts |
| Holden v. Hardy Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366 , is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a Utah state law limiting the number of work hours for miners and smelters as a legitimate exercise of the police power...
|
| working hours of miners |
| United States v. Wong Kim Ark United States v. Wong Kim Ark, , was a United States Supreme Court decision that set an important legal precedent about what determines United States citizenship.- Facts :...
|
| citizenship and race |
| Hawker v. New York Hawker v. New York, 170 U.S. 189 , is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a New York state law preventing convicted felons from practicing medicine, even when the felony conviction occurred before the law was enacted....
|
| character and doctor’s licenses |
| Williams v. Mississippi Williams v. Mississippi, 170 U.S. 213 is a United States Supreme Court case that reviewed provisions of the state constitution that set requirements for voter registration...
|
| literacy test Literacy Test, in the context of United States political history, refers to the government practice of testing the literacy of potential citizens at the federal level, and potential voters at the state level. The federal government first employed literacy tests as part of the immigration process in...
s |
| Brown v. New Jersey |
| use of a struck jury A struck jury is a multi-step process of selecting a jury from a pool. First potential jurors are eliminated for hardship. Second jurors are eliminated for cause by conducting voir dire until there is a pool available that is exactly the size of the final jury plus the number of peremptory...
|
| Malony v. Adsit |
| property issues |
| Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education, 175 U.S. 528 was a class action suit decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. It is a landmark case, in that it sanctioned de jure segregation of races in American schools. The Supreme Court overturned its decision in Brown v...
|
|
| Case name |
Citation |
Summary
|
| The Paquete Habana Paquete Habana.; The Lola, 175 U.S. 677 , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that reversed an earlier court decision allowing the capture of fishing vessels under Prize...
|
| prize Prize is a term used in admiralty law to refer to equipment, vehicles, and vessels captured during armed conflict. The most common use of prize in this sense is the capture of an enemy ship and its cargo as a prize of war. In the past, it was common that the capturing force would be allotted a...
in admiralty lawAdmiralty law is a distinct body of law which governs maritime questions and offenses. It is a body of both domestic law governing maritime activities, and private international law governing the relationships between private entities which operate vessels on the oceans...
and customary international lawCustomary international law are those aspects of international law that derive from custom. Coupled with general principles of law and treaties, custom is considered by the International Court of Justice, jurists, the United Nations, and its member states to be among the primary sources of...
|
| Marks v. Shoup |
| Property issues |
| Insular Cases The Insular Cases are several U.S. Supreme Court cases decided early in the 20th century. The cases were in essence the court's response to a major issue of the United States presidential election, 1900 and the American Anti-Imperialist League, summarized by the phrase "Does the Constitution...
|
| DeLima v. Bidwell DeLima v. Bidwell, , was one of a group of the first Insular Cases decided by the United States Supreme Court.The case was argued on January 8-11, 1901 and was decided on May 27, 1901....
|
| constitutional status of Puerto RicoPuerto Rico , officially the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico , is a self-governing unincorporated territory of the United States located in the northeastern Caribbean, east of the Dominican Republic and west of the Virgin Islands...
and the PhilippinesThe Philippines officially known as the Republic of the Philippines, is a country in Southeast Asia with Manila as its capital city. It comprises 7,107 islands in the western Pacific Ocean....
|
| Goetze v. United States |
|
| Armstrong v. United States |
|
| Downes v. Bidwell Downes v. Bidwell, , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court decided whether United States territories were subject to the provisions and protections of the United States Constitution. This question is sometimes stated as "does the Constitution follow the flag?". The resulting decision...
|
|
| Huus v. New York & Porto Rico S.S. Co. |
|
| Dooley v. United States |
|
| Fourteen Diamond Rings v. United States |
|
| Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, is a United States Supreme Court decision which declared that the "plenary power" of the United States Congress gave it authority to unilaterally abrogate treaty obligations between the United States and Native American tribes. The decision marked a departure from the...
|
| power of Congress to abrogate treaties with Native American tribesNative Americans in the United States is the phrase that describes indigenous peoples from North America now encompassed by the continental United States, including parts of Alaska and the island state of Hawaii. They comprise a large number of distinct tribes, states, and ethnic groups, many of...
|
| Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Company Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Company, 188 U.S. 239 , is a case in which the United States Supreme Court found that advertisements were protected by copyright.-Facts:...
|
| copyrightCopyright is a form of intellectual property that gives the author of an original work exclusive right for a certain time period in relation to that work, including its publication, distribution and adaptation, after which time the work is said to enter the public domain...
protection of illustrations made for advertisements |
| Champion v. Ames Champion v. Ames, 188 U.S. 321 , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that trafficking lottery tickets constituted interstate commerce that could be regulated by the U.S. Congress under the Commerce Clause....
|
| Congressional Commerce Clause The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution . The clause states that the United States Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the states, and with the Native American tribes...
regulation of lottery tickets |
| Giles v. Harris Giles v. Harris, 189 U.S. 475 , was a turn-of-the-century United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a state constitution's requirements for voter registration and qualifications...
|
| voting rights, Eleventh AmendmentThe Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, which was passed by the Congress on March 4, 1794 and was ratified on February 7, 1795, deals with each state's sovereign immunity from being sued in federal court by someone of another state or country. This amendment was adopted in...
|
| Hawaii v. Manikichi |
| sometimes considered one of the Insular Cases The Insular Cases are several U.S. Supreme Court cases decided early in the 20th century. The cases were in essence the court's response to a major issue of the United States presidential election, 1900 and the American Anti-Imperialist League, summarized by the phrase "Does the Constitution...
|
| Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Clay May Missouri, Kansas, & Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Clay May, 194 U.S. 267 , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that a Texas law did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution by penalizing only railroad companies for allowing certain weeds to...
|
| 14th Amendment permits law which penalizes railroads for allowing weeds to grow |
| Kepner v. United States |
| sometimes considered one of the Insular Cases The Insular Cases are several U.S. Supreme Court cases decided early in the 20th century. The cases were in essence the court's response to a major issue of the United States presidential election, 1900 and the American Anti-Imperialist League, summarized by the phrase "Does the Constitution...
|
| Dorr v. United States |
| sometimes considered one of the Insular Cases The Insular Cases are several U.S. Supreme Court cases decided early in the 20th century. The cases were in essence the court's response to a major issue of the United States presidential election, 1900 and the American Anti-Imperialist League, summarized by the phrase "Does the Constitution...
|
| Gonzales v. Williams |
| Puerto Ricans and illegal aliens |
| Northern Securities Co. v. United States Northern Securities Co. v. United States, 193 U.S. 197 , was an important ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court ruled 5 to 4 against the stockholders of the Great Northern and Northern Pacific railroad companies, who had essentially formed a monopoly, and to dissolve the Northern Securities...
|
| AntitrustUnited States antitrust law is the body of laws that prohibits anti-competitive behavior and unfair business practices. Antitrust laws are designed to encourage competition in the marketplace....
, application of the Sherman Antitrust ActThe Sherman Antitrust Act requires the United States Federal government to investigate and pursue trusts, companies and organizations suspected of violating the Act...
|
| Rasmussen v. United States |
| sometimes considered one of the Insular Cases The Insular Cases are several U.S. Supreme Court cases decided early in the 20th century. The cases were in essence the court's response to a major issue of the United States presidential election, 1900 and the American Anti-Imperialist League, summarized by the phrase "Does the Constitution...
|
Lochner v. New YorkLochner v. New York, , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that held a "liberty of contract" was implicit in the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involved a New York law that limited the number of hours to ten that a baker could work each day, and to 60 the hours...
|
| freedom of contract, substantive due process |
| Harris v. Balk Harris v. Balk, was a United States Supreme Court case that exemplified the bizarre types of jurisdiction state courts could assert through quasi in rem actions before International Shoe's "minimum contacts" test replaced Pennoyer's principles of "power and notice".This case involved three...
|
| quasi in rem Quasi in rem is a legal term referring to a legal action based on property rights of a person absent from the jurisdiction. The state can assert power over an individual simply based on the fact that this individual has property in the state. As a result of the United States Supreme Court Case...
jurisdiction |
| Chicago Board of Trade v. Christie Grain Chicago Board of Trade v. Christie Grain, 198 U.S. 236 , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which upheld sales of grain for future delivery and the substitution of parties, provided for by the rules of the Chicago Board of Trade. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr...
|
| upholding power of Chicago Board of TradeThe Chicago Board of Trade , established in 1848, is the world's oldest futures and options exchange. More than 50 different options and futures contracts are traded by over 3,600 CBOT members through open outcry and eTrading. Volumes at the exchange in 2003 were a record breaking 454 million...
to regulate futures contractFutures contract, in finance, refers to a standardized contract to buy or sell a specified commodity of standardized quality at a certain date in the future, at a market determined price . The contracts are traded on a futures exchange. Futures contracts are not "direct" securities like stocks,...
s |
| Hale v. Henkel |
| witness testimony in antitrust cases |
| Northwestern National Life Insurance Co. v. Riggs Northwestern National Life Insurance Co. v. Riggs, , was an important United States Supreme Court case dealing with corporations conducting business and the power of individual states to regulate how corporations may conduct business.-Facts:...
|
| upheld power of states to regulate insurance contracts against Fourteenth Amendment challenge |
| United States v. Shipp United States v. Shipp, 203 U.S. 563, was a ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States with regard to events surrounding a lynching in Tennessee. It is the only criminal trial of the Supreme Court in its history.-Background:...
|
| Only criminal trial in the court's history. LynchingLynching is an extrajudicial punishment meted by a mob, usually by hanging. It is an enumerated felony in all states of the United States, defined by some codes of law as "Any act of violence inflicted by a mob upon the body of another person which results in the death of the person," with a 'mob'...
. |
| Adair v. United States Adair v. United States, , was a United States Supreme Court decision that upheld "yellow-dog" contracts that forbade workers from joining trade unions.-The case:...
|
| "Yellow Dog contract" |
| Loewe v. Lawlor Loewe v. Lawlor, 208 U.S. 274 , was a U.S. Supreme Court decision in which a labor boycott of D. E. Loewe & Company by the Hatters' Union was deemed a conspiracy in restraint of trade that violated the Sherman Antitrust Act and accordingly awarded threefold damages to the company. This case was...
|
| Sherman Antitrust Act The Sherman Antitrust Act requires the United States Federal government to investigate and pursue trusts, companies and organizations suspected of violating the Act...
applied against labor union boycott |
| Muller v. Oregon Muller v. Oregon, , was a landmark decision in United States Supreme Court history, as it relates to both sex discrimination and usage and labor laws...
|
| protective labor laws, protection of women |
White-Smith Music Publishing Company v. Apollo CompanyWhite-Smith Music Publishing Company v. Apollo Company, 209 U.S. 1 , was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which ruled that manufacturers of music rolls for player pianos did not have to pay royalties to the composers...
|
| manufacturers of player pianoA player piano is a self-playing piano, containing a pneumatic or electro-mechanical mechanism that operates the piano action via pre-programmed music perforated paper, or in rare instances, metallic rolls...
s need not pay royaltiesRoyalties are usage-based payments made by one party to another for ongoing use of an asset, sometimes an intellectual property right. Royalties are typically a percentage of gross or net sales derived from use of an asset or a fixed price per unit sold of an item...
to copyrightCopyright is a form of intellectual property that gives the author of an original work exclusive right for a certain time period in relation to that work, including its publication, distribution and adaptation, after which time the work is said to enter the public domain...
holders of music |
| Ex parte Young Ex parte Young, , is a United States Supreme Court case that allows suits in federal courts against officials acting on behalf of states of the union to proceed despite the State's sovereign immunity, when the State acted unconstitutionally.-Facts:...
|
| exception to sovereign immunity Sovereign immunity, or crown immunity, is a type of immunity that in common law jurisdictions traces its origins from early English law. Generally speaking it is the doctrine that the sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution; hence the...
under the Eleventh Amendment |
| Ware & Leland v. Mobile County Ware & Leland v. Mobile County, 209 U.S. 405 , is a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that contracts for the sales of cotton for future delivery that do not oblige interstate shipments are not subjects of interstate commerce...
|
| contracts for the sales of cottonCotton is a soft, staple fiber that grows in a form known as a boll around the seeds of the cotton plant, a shrub native to tropical and subtropical regions around the world, including the Americas, India and Africa. The fiber most often is spun into yarn or thread and used to make a soft,...
for future delivery that do not oblige interstate shipments are not subjects of interstate commerce, and are taxable by states |
| Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus, , was a United States Supreme Court decision concerning the scope of rights accorded owners of a copyright. This was a case of first impression concerning whether the copyright laws permit an owner to control a purchaser's subsequent sale of a copyrighted work...
|
| First-sale doctrine The first-sale doctrine is a limitation on copyright that was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1908 and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, . The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has...
, copyright holder cannot control resale prices by use of licenses |
| Londoner v. City and County of Denver Londoner v. City and County of Denver, 210 U.S. 373 , is a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that Due Process rights under the U.S...
|
| role of due process in administrative rulemaking |
| Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co. Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co., 210 U.S. 405 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States established the principle that patent holders have no obligation to use their patent.- Facts :...
|
| patent and antitrust |
| Berea College v. Kentucky Berea College v. Kentucky , was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court that upheld the rights of states to prohibit private educational institutions chartered as corporations from admitting both black and white students. Like the related Plessy v. Ferguson case, it was...
|
| state laws and segregation of educational facilities |
| Twining v. New Jersey Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78 , was a 1908 U.S. Supreme Court case. The case involved two men charged with fraud in New Jersey who claimed 5th Amendment protection and refused to testify during their trial. The jury was told of the men's failure to testify, and the men were convicted...
|
| Fifth AmendmentThe Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215...
does not apply to state trials |
| Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Mottley, 211 U.S. 149 , was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that under the existing statutory scheme, federal question jurisdiction could not be predicated on a plaintiff's anticipation that the defendant would raise a federal statute as a...
|
| federal question jurisdiction Federal question jurisdiction is a term used in the United States law of civil procedure to refer to the situation in which a United States federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction to hear a civil case because the plaintiff has alleged a violation of the Constitution or law of the United...
, the "well-pleaded complaint rule" |
| Bailey v. Alabama |
| peonage laws and the Thirteenth AmendmentThe Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was adopted on December 6, 1865, and was then declared in a proclamation of Secretary of State William H...
|
Moyer v. PeabodyMoyer v. Peabody, 212 U.S. 78 , is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the governor and officers of a state National Guard, acting in good faith and under authority of law, may imprison without probable cause a citizen of the United States in a time of insurrection and...
|
| citizens' rights during insurrection |
| Welch v. Swasey Welch v. Swasey, 214 U.S. 91 , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the statutes of Massachusetts, chap. 333 of the Acts of 1904, and chap. 383 of the Acts of 1905, limit the height of buildings in a certain quarter of a city, do not violate the Constitution of the...
|
| MassachusettsThe Commonwealth of Massachusetts is a state in the New England region of the northeastern United States. It is bordered by Rhode Island and Connecticut to the south, New York to the west, and Vermont and New Hampshire to the north; at its east lies the Atlantic Ocean. Most of its population of...
' statute restricting building heights is constitutional |