Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Interstate commerce (3)
- Alabama (1)
- Ambiguity (1)
- Bullen v. Wisconsin (1)
- Chandler Act (1)
-
- Close and substantial (1)
- Cloth (1)
- Curry v. McCanless (1)
- Dahnke Walker Milling Co. v. Bondurant (1)
- Discretionary (1)
- Diversity of citizenship (1)
- Domicile (1)
- Exclusive (1)
- Exports (1)
- Graves v. Elliott (1)
- Imports (1)
- In re Avondale Farms Dairy Inc. (1)
- Indiana (1)
- Inheritance tax (1)
- Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v. City of Carrollton (1)
- Judges Bill of 1925 (1)
- King (1)
- Labor organizations (1)
- Labor unions (1)
- Lee Company (1)
- Multiple states (1)
- NLRA (1)
- National Labor Relations Board v. Fainblatt (1)
- New Jersey (1)
- New York (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Taxation - Jurisdiction To Tax - Multiple Taxation Of Intangibles, Richard Brawerman
Taxation - Jurisdiction To Tax - Multiple Taxation Of Intangibles, Richard Brawerman
Michigan Law Review
In two recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court, Curry v. McCanless, and Graves v. Elliott, a majority of the justices refused to adhere to the doctrine that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits taxation of intangibles by more than one state, and subscribed instead to the view that control and benefit are together the only test of jurisdiction of the states to tax. In Curry v. McCanless, the decedent, a resident of Tennessee, had created a trust of intangibles, reserving control over the income during her life and power to revoke the trust by will. The trust …
Labor Law - National Labor Relations Act - Jurisdiction Of The National Labor Relations Board, John C. Griffin
Labor Law - National Labor Relations Act - Jurisdiction Of The National Labor Relations Board, John C. Griffin
Michigan Law Review
Respondent, employing about sixty persons, was the sole owner of a garment-tailoring concern in New Jersey. His only business was with the Lee Company, a New York firm, that sold finished goods. There was no financial affiliation between them. The Lee Company purchased the cloth and caused it to be delivered to respondent. Respondent tailored it and delivered the finished product to a representative of the Lee Company at respondent's plant. This representative sent it back to New York in Lee Company trucks. Title to the cloth remained throughout in the Lee Company. Held, Justices McReynolds and Butler dissenting, …
Bankruptcy - Corporate Reorganization - Validity Of Process Outside Territorial Confines Of Federal District Court, Edmund O'Hare
Bankruptcy - Corporate Reorganization - Validity Of Process Outside Territorial Confines Of Federal District Court, Edmund O'Hare
Michigan Law Review
Debtor corporation had contracted with defendant, operator of a retail store, whereby defendant agreed to sell debtor's products exclusively and to buy all of his supplies from debtor. While debtor was in the course of section 77 B reorganization proceedings, defendant refused to continue to comply with the contract, Defendant resided and did business in the same state and federal judicial circuit in which the reorganization court was located, but not within the territorial confines of the court, nor was process served upon defendant within the court's territorial jurisdiction. Debtor moved for specific performance of the contract. Held, debtor's …
Labor Law - Extent Of Jurisdiction Of The National Labor Relations Board, Ward P. Allen
Labor Law - Extent Of Jurisdiction Of The National Labor Relations Board, Ward P. Allen
Michigan Law Review
What possible legal or logical connection is there between an employee's membership in a labor organization and the carrying on of interstate commerce? It is "clear that the mere reduction in the supply of an article to be shipped in interstate commerce, by the illegal or tortious prevention of its manufacture, is ordinarily an indirect and remote obstruction on that commerce." Strange sounding words, these, so completely have these doctrines been repudiated in the National Labor Relations Act and the cases supporting it. The law is anything but static; and the legal touchstone of this "extension" of the interstate commerce …
Prohibition - Is The Writ Of Prohibition A Prerogative Writ?, Russel T. Walker
Prohibition - Is The Writ Of Prohibition A Prerogative Writ?, Russel T. Walker
Michigan Law Review
The writ of prohibition originally issued from the king's temporal courts to the ecclesiastical courts to prevent any usurpation of jurisdiction of the king's courts by the spiritual courts. Prohibition has been classed as one of the prerogative writs, that is, a writ issued by the extraordinary power of the sovereign to interfere with private rights in order to preserve the prerogatives and franchises of the state. The writ of prohibition differed historically from the other prerogative writs in that its issuance was not discretionary with the court, but rather it was held to issue as a matter of right …
Obligatory Jurisdiction Of The Supreme Court: Appeals From State Courts Under Section 237(A) Of The Judicial Code, Seymour J. Rubin, Sidney H. Willner
Obligatory Jurisdiction Of The Supreme Court: Appeals From State Courts Under Section 237(A) Of The Judicial Code, Seymour J. Rubin, Sidney H. Willner
Michigan Law Review
In two ways, a case decided by the state court of last resort may come to the Supreme Court of the United States: by certiorari, or by appeal. Certiorari is discretionary; and the considerations which will lead the Court to grant a writ of certiorari are set out in Rule 38 of the Supreme Court Rules, and are well-known to the practicing bar. Appeal, however, is directed to the obligatory jurisdiction of the Court. Rule 12 merely sets out the procedure to be followed in seeking an appeal; and for his decision as to whether he has substantive basis for …
Courts - Federal Courts - Removal Of Causes - Amendment To Complaint After Removal Reducing Amount In Controversy To Less Than The Jurisdictional Amount, Robert E. Sipes
Courts - Federal Courts - Removal Of Causes - Amendment To Complaint After Removal Reducing Amount In Controversy To Less Than The Jurisdictional Amount, Robert E. Sipes
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff began his action for breach of contract in a state court of Indiana. On defendant's timely petition the suit was removed to the United States District Court. Plaintiff then amended his pleadings by filing particulars of his claim which reduced the amount recoverable below the jurisdictional amount. On a writ of certiorari it was held that the jurisdiction of the district court was not defeated by the amendment reducing the amount claimed to below the jurisdictional amount. Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283, 58 S. Ct. 586 (1938).