Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Abandoned property (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Attachment (1)
- Bona vacantia (1)
- Breach (1)
-
- Clayton Act (1)
- Collateral attack (1)
- Collective bargaining agreement (1)
- Competition (1)
- Conformity Act (1)
- Congressional amendment (1)
- Congressional authority (1)
- Damage (1)
- District court (1)
- Equity power (1)
- Escheat (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Federal Trade Commission Act (1)
- Federal pre-emption (1)
- Full Faith and Credit Clause (1)
- Garnishment (1)
- Grand Union (1)
- Grievance (1)
- Harmonization (1)
- Harris v. Balk (1)
- Hollingsworth v. Adams (1)
- Incipiency violation doctrine (1)
- Injunction (1)
- Intangible property (1)
- Judiciary Act (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Guides To Harmonizing Section 5 Of The Federal Trade Commission Act With The Sherman And Clayton Acts, S. Chesterfield Oppenheim
Guides To Harmonizing Section 5 Of The Federal Trade Commission Act With The Sherman And Clayton Acts, S. Chesterfield Oppenheim
Michigan Law Review
This topic is a constellation of antitrust highlights. Within the past five years the Federal Trade Commission has ventured into borderlands of its claim of jurisdiction under section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act in testing the scope of section 5 itself and its relation to the Commission's jurisdiction under the Sherman and Clayton Acts.
No-Strike Clauses In The Federal Courts, Frank H. Stewart
No-Strike Clauses In The Federal Courts, Frank H. Stewart
Michigan Law Review
One consideration will support several promises. A promisor may extract more than one promise in return for his single undertaking to do - or not to do. It depends upon his bargaining power. His single undertaking may be so valuable that several promises are necessary to induce him to act, or not to act. He is privileged to hold out for the best deal. The law does not examine his motives or reduce his demands. And from this arises the common- law principle that one consideration may support several promises.
Escheat - Abandoned Property - Full Faith And Credit As A Bar To Multiple Escheat Of Intangibles, Clarold L. Britton S.Ed.
Escheat - Abandoned Property - Full Faith And Credit As A Bar To Multiple Escheat Of Intangibles, Clarold L. Britton S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Escheat of abandoned or unclaimed property by the sovereign is as old as the common law. Recast in constitutional form, this ancient right of kings has become a significant source of revenue in an increasing number of American states. While the right of escheat is inherent in the power of a sovereign, its exercise requires specific legislative authority. Until recently this authority was sparingly given and escheat was generally limited to the administration of estates and abandoned tangible property. However, in this past decade, state legislatures have greatly expanded the scope and extent of escheat by authorizing the escheat of …
Attachment And Garnishment In The Federal Courts, Brainerd Currie
Attachment And Garnishment In The Federal Courts, Brainerd Currie
Michigan Law Review
Personal injuries allegedly caused by the negligent manufacture of safety fuses used in blasting operations in a coal mine were suffered by Raymond Davis, apparently a citizen of Arkansas. The manufacturer, Ensign-Bickford Company, was a Connecticut corporation that could not be personally served with process within Arkansas. But it happened that two foreign corporations, amenable to process in the state, were indebted in substantial amounts to Ensign-Bickford Company. Accordingly, counsel for Davis, invoking the diversity jurisdiction, filed an action in the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. Without issue of summons, the plaintiff, in conformity with Arkansas statutes, …