Terral v. Burke Const Co, No. 93
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | TAFT |
| Citation | 257 U.S. 529,21 A. L. R. 186,42 S.Ct. 188,66 L.Ed. 352 |
| Docket Number | No. 93 |
| Decision Date | 17 January 1922 |
| Parties | TERRAL, Secretary of State of Arkansas, v. BURKE CONST. CO. Argued for Appellee, Court Declining to Hear Further Argument |
v.
BURKE CONST. CO.
Messrs. J. S. Utley, Atty. Gen., and Frank S. Quinn, of Texarkana, for appellant.
Page 530
Messrs. Wm. Marshall Bullitt, of Louisville, Ky., and James B. McDonough, of Ft. Smith, Ark., for appellee.
Mr. Chief Justice TAFT delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is an appeal from the District Court under section 238 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 1215) in a case in which the law of a state is claimed to be in contravention of the Constitution of the United States.
The Burke Construction Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Missouri, filed its bill against Terral, Secretary of State of Arkansas, averring that it has been licensed to do business in the state of Arkansas under an act of the Arkansas Legislature approved May 13, 1907 (Laws 1907, p. 744); that it was organized for the purpose of doing construction work, and carrying on interstate commerce, and was actually so engaged in Arkansas; that the right to do business in the state was a valuable privilege, and the revocation of the license would greatly injure it; that it had brought an original suit in the federal court of Arkansas and had removed a suit brought against it to the same federal court; that the Secretary of State was about to revoke the license because of such suit and such removal, acting under the requirement of section 1 of the act of the Legislature of Arkansas of May 13, 1907, reading as follows:
Page 531
'If any company shall, without the consent of the other party to any suit or proceeding brought by or against it in any court of this state, remove said suit or proceeding to any federal court, or shall institute any suit or proceeding against any citizen of this state in any federal court, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to forthwith revoke all authority to such company and its agents to do business in this state, and to publish such revocation in some newspaper of general circulation published in this state; and if such corporation shall thereafter continue to do business in this state, it shall be subject to the penalty of this act for each day it shall continue to do business in this state after such revocation.'
The penalty fixed is not less than $1,000 a The Construction Company avers that this act is in contravention of section 2, article 3, i. e., the judiciary article of the federal Constitution, and of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The defendant filed an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Watson v. Employers Liability Assurance Corporation, No. 6
...to surrender constitutional rights as a condition of being permitted to do business in the state. See Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529, 42 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed. 352. That Page 74 principle is inapplicable to this case because, as we have just decided, Louisiana has a constitutio......
-
Bagley v. Washington Tp. Hospital Dist., S.F. 21831
...Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Com. (1926) 271 U.S. 583, 593--594, 46 S.Ct. 605, 70 L.Ed. 1101; Terral v. Burke Constr. Co. (1922) 257 U.S. 529, 532--533, 42 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed. 352.) The government employee should no more enjoy the right to wrap himself in the flag of constitutiona......
-
Bryan v. Austin, Civ. A. 5792.
...here involved is that the state may not deny a privilege because of exercise of constitutional rights. Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529, 42 S.Ct. 188, 66 L. Ed. 352; Frost (Frost Trucking Co.) v. Railroad Commission, 271 U.S. 583, 594, 46 S.Ct. 605, 70 L.Ed. 1101; Alston v. Sc......
-
State v. Southern Natural Gas Corporation, 3 Div. 173
...the right to exclude a foreign corporation cannot be used to prevent it from resorting to a federal Court, Terral v. Burke Const. Co. 257 U.S. 529, S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed. 352, 21 A.L.R. 186; or to tax it upon property that by established principles the State has no power to tax, Western U. Tel......
-
Watson v. Employers Liability Assurance Corporation, No. 6
...to surrender constitutional rights as a condition of being permitted to do business in the state. See Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529, 42 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed. 352. That Page 74 principle is inapplicable to this case because, as we have just decided, Louisiana has a constitutio......
-
Bagley v. Washington Tp. Hospital Dist., S.F. 21831
...Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Com. (1926) 271 U.S. 583, 593--594, 46 S.Ct. 605, 70 L.Ed. 1101; Terral v. Burke Constr. Co. (1922) 257 U.S. 529, 532--533, 42 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed. 352.) The government employee should no more enjoy the right to wrap himself in the flag of constitutiona......
-
Bryan v. Austin, Civ. A. 5792.
...here involved is that the state may not deny a privilege because of exercise of constitutional rights. Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529, 42 S.Ct. 188, 66 L. Ed. 352; Frost (Frost Trucking Co.) v. Railroad Commission, 271 U.S. 583, 594, 46 S.Ct. 605, 70 L.Ed. 1101; Alston v. Sc......
-
State v. Southern Natural Gas Corporation, 3 Div. 173
...the right to exclude a foreign corporation cannot be used to prevent it from resorting to a federal Court, Terral v. Burke Const. Co. 257 U.S. 529, S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed. 352, 21 A.L.R. 186; or to tax it upon property that by established principles the State has no power to tax, Western U. Tel......
-
The South Counterattacks: the Anti-Naacp Laws
...rare privileges and immunities of national citizenship. Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 79 (1873); Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529 against any group, to enjoin temporarily further NAACP operations. Afteran involved court fight, which seems to have left the Negroes, the st......