To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 198

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Supreme Court of the United States
Map
38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
EstablishedMarch 4, 1789; 234 years ago (1789-03-04)
LocationWashington, D.C.
Coordinates38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
Composition methodPresidential nomination with Senate confirmation
Authorized byConstitution of the United States, Art. III, § 1
Judge term lengthlife tenure, subject to impeachment and removal
Number of positions9 (by statute)
Websitesupremecourt.gov

This is a list of cases reported in volume 198 of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1905.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/2
    Views:
    313
    742
  • Citation signal
  • CSULB - Science Colloquium Jim Stein

Transcription

Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of volume 198 U.S.

The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[1] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).

When the cases in volume 198 were decided the Court comprised the following nine members:

Portrait Justice Office Home State Succeeded Date confirmed by the Senate
(Vote)
Tenure on Supreme Court
Melville Fuller Chief Justice Illinois Morrison Waite July 20, 1888
(41–20)
October 8, 1888

July 4, 1910
(Died)
John Marshall Harlan Associate Justice Kentucky David Davis November 29, 1877
(Acclamation)
December 10, 1877

October 14, 1911
(Died)
David Josiah Brewer Associate Justice Kansas Stanley Matthews December 18, 1889
(53–11)
January 6, 1890

March 28, 1910
(Died)
Henry Billings Brown Associate Justice Michigan Samuel Freeman Miller December 29, 1890
(Acclamation)
January 5, 1891

May 28, 1906
(Retired)
Edward Douglass White Associate Justice Louisiana Samuel Blatchford February 19, 1894
(Acclamation)
March 12, 1894

December 18, 1910
(Continued as chief justice)
Rufus W. Peckham Associate Justice New York Howell Edmunds Jackson December 9, 1895
(Acclamation)
January 6, 1896

October 24, 1909
(Died)
Joseph McKenna Associate Justice California Stephen Johnson Field January 21, 1898
(Acclamation)
January 26, 1898

January 5, 1925
(Retired)
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Associate Justice Massachusetts Horace Gray December 4, 1902
(Acclamation)
December 8, 1902

January 12, 1932
(Retired)
William R. Day Associate Justice Ohio George Shiras Jr. February 23, 1903
(Acclamation)
March 2, 1903

November 13, 1922
(Retired)

Notable Cases in 198 U.S.

Lochner v. New York

Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905), is a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court ruled that a New York state law setting maximum working hours for bakers violated the bakers' right to freedom of contract under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The underlying case began in 1899 when Joseph Lochner, a German immigrant who owned a bakery in Utica, New York, was charged with violating New York's Bakeshop Act of 1895. The Bakeshop Act had made it a crime for New York bakeries to employ bakers for more than 10 hours per day or 60 hours per week. He was convicted and ultimately appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. A majority of the Supreme Court held that the law violated the due process clause, stating that the law constituted an "unreasonable, unnecessary and arbitrary interference with the right and liberty of the individual to contract". Four dissenting justices rejected that view, and the dissent of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in particular, became one of the most famous opinions in US legal history. Holmes wrote:

"[A] constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory, whether of paternalism and the organic relation of the citizen to the State or of laissez faire. It is made for people of fundamentally differing views, and the accident of our finding certain opinions natural and familiar or novel and even shocking ought not to conclude our judgment upon the question whether statutes embodying them conflict with the Constitution of the United States. General propositions do not decide concrete cases". (198 U.S. 75-76)

United States v. Ju Toy

In United States v. Ju Toy, 198 U.S. 253 (1905), the Supreme Court held that a citizen of the United States could be barred entry into the country based solely on an administrative decision, without routine recourse to the courts even on the factual question of citizenship. The Court determined that refusing entry at a port does not deny due process, and held that findings by immigration officials are conclusive and not subject to judicial review unless there is evidence of bias or negligence. This case marked a shift in the Court in respect to habeas corpus petitions and altered the judicial landscape for citizens applying for admission into the United States as well as for those facing deportation. The Court came to a different conclusion in 1922, that habeas corpus petitioners are entitled to a de novo judicial hearing to determine whether they are U.S. citizens (Ng Fung Ho v. White).

Citation style

Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.

The Judiciary Act of 1891 created the United States Courts of Appeals and reassigned the jurisdiction of most routine appeals from the district and circuit courts to these appellate courts. The Act created nine new courts that were originally known as the "United States Circuit Courts of Appeals." The new courts had jurisdiction over most appeals of lower court decisions. The Supreme Court could review either legal issues that a court of appeals certified or decisions of court of appeals by writ of certiorari.

Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.

List of cases in volume 198 U.S.

Case Name Page & year Opinion of the Court Concurring opinion(s) Dissenting opinion(s) Lower Court Disposition
Benson v. Henkel 1 (1905) Brown Day none C.C.S.D.N.Y. affirmed
Pabst B. Co. v. Crenshaw 17 (1905) White none Brown C.C.W.D. Mo. affirmed
Lochner v. New York 45 (1905) Peckham none Harlan; Holmes Oneida Cnty. Ct. reversed
Beavers v. Haubert 77 (1905) McKenna none none E.D.N.Y. affirmed
Humphrey v. Tatman 91 (1905) Holmes none none Mass. Super. Ct. reversed
Remington v. Central P.R.R. Co. 95 (1905) Holmes none none C.C.N.D.N.Y. affirmed
City of Covington v. First Nat'l Bank 100 (1905) Day none none C.C.E.D. Ky. affirmed
Bonin v. Gulf Co. 115 (1905) Fuller none none 5th Cir. dismissed
Howe S. Co. v. Wyckoff, S. & B. 118 (1905) Fuller none none 2d Cir. reversed
Steigleder v. McQuesten 141 (1905) Harlan none none C.C.D. Wash. affirmed
Jaster v. Currie 144 (1905) Holmes none none Neb. reversed
Allen v. Arguimbau 149 (1905) Fuller none none Fla. dismissed
Rodriguez v. United States 156 (1905) Harlan none none D.P.R. affirmed
Dunbar v. Green 166 (1905) Brown none none Kan. reversed
In re Glaser 171 (1905) Fuller none none C.C.E.D.N.Y. mandamus denied
Schlosser v. Hemphill 173 (1905) Fuller none none Iowa dismissed
Wells Co. v. Gastonia C. Mfg. Co. 177 (1905) Harlan none none 4th Cir. reversed
Riverdale C.M. v. Alabama G. Mfg. Co. 188 (1905) Brewer none none 5th Cir. affirmed
Holden v. Stratton 202 (1905) White none none 9th Cir. reversed
Harris v. Balk 215 (1905) Peckham none none N.C. reversed
Harley v. United States 229 (1905) McKenna none none Ct. Cl. affirmed
Chicago Bd. Trade v. Christie G. & S. Co. 236 (1905) Holmes none none 8th Cir. multiple
United States v. Ju Toy 253 (1905) Holmes none Brewer 9th Cir. certification
First Nat'l Bank v. Chicago T. & T. Co. 280 (1905) Fuller none none 7th Cir. reversed
Empire State et al. Co. v. Hanley 292 (1905) Fuller none none 9th Cir. dismissed
Old Dominion S.S. Co. v. Virginia 299 (1905) Brewer none none Va. affirmed
Thompson v. Darden 310 (1905) White none none Va. affirmed
Harding v. Harding 317 (1905) White none none Cal. reversed
Delaware et al. R.R. Co. v. Pennsylvania 341 (1905) Peckham none none Pa. reversed
Clark v. Nash 361 (1905) Peckham none none Utah affirmed
United States v. Winans 371 (1905) McKenna none none C.C.D. Wash. reversed
Chicago et al. Ry. Co. v. United States 385 (1905) McKenna none none Ct. Cl. affirmed
Birrell v. New York & H.R.R. Co. 390 (1905) McKenna none none N.Y. Sup. Ct. reversed
Savannah et al. Ry. v. City of Savannah 392 (1905) Holmes none none Ga. affirmed
Cimiotti U. Co. v. American F.R. Co. 399 (1905) Day none none 3d Cir. affirmed
Leonard v. Vicksburg et al. R.R. Co. 416 (1905) Fuller none none La. dismissed
Chicago Bd. Trade v. Hammond E. Co. 424 (1905) Brown none none C.C.N.D. Ill. reversed
Lavagnino v. Uhlig 443 (1905) White none none Utah affirmed
Cunnius v. Reading Sch. Dist. 458 (1905) White none none Pa. affirmed
Kendall v. American A.L. Co. 477 (1905) Peckham none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. affirmed
Louisville & N.R.R. Co. v. West C.N.S. Co. 483 (1905) Peckham none none 5th Cir. reversed
Ah Sin v. Wittman 500 (1905) McKenna none none Cal. Super. Ct. affirmed
Knights of Pythias v. Meyer 508 (1905) McKenna none none N.Y. Sup. Ct. affirmed
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Dashiell 521 (1905) McKenna none none 5th Cir. affirmed
Union T. Co. v. Wilson 530 (1905) Holmes none none 7th Cir. certification
Whitney v. Wenman 539 (1905) Day none none S.D.N.Y. reversed
Van Reed v. People's Nat'l Bank 554 (1905) Day none none N.Y. affirmed
Great et al. Co. v. Harris 561 (1905) Day none none 2d Cir. affirmed

Notes and references

  1. ^ "Supreme Court Research Guide". Georgetown Law Library. Retrieved April 7, 2021.

See also

External links

This page was last edited on 30 September 2023, at 15:26
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.