United States v. Charles Williams 30, 31 1902
| Decision Date | 22 December 1902 |
| Docket Number | No. 59,59 |
| Citation | 188 U.S. 485,23 S.Ct. 363,47 L.Ed. 554 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. CHARLES A. WILLIAMS et al. Argued October 30, 31, 1902. Ordered for reargument |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Mr. Robert A. Howard, and Solicitor General Richards for United states.
Messrs. Julian Mitchell, Jr., Henry A. M. Smith, and Julian Mitchell for defendants in error.
This case is in all substantial respects similar to the one just decided [United States v. Lynah, 187 U. S. —, ante, 349, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 349], and for the reasons given in the opinion therein the judgment is affirmed.
For the reason stated in their dissenting opinion in the prior case, the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent also in this case.
Mr. Justice McKenna took no part in the decision of these cases.
To continue reading
Request your trial
8 cases
-
Rank v. Krug
...539; Pumpelly v. Green Bay, etc. Co., 1872, 13 Wall. 166, 20 L.Ed. 557; Williams v. U. S., C.C. 1903, 104 F. 50 affirmed 188 U.S. 485, 23 S.Ct. 363, 47 L.Ed. 554; U. S. v. Cress, 1917, 243 U.S. 316, 37 S.Ct. 380, 61 L.Ed. 746; U. S. v. Dickinson, 1947, 331 U.S. 745, 67 S.Ct. 1382, 91 L.Ed. ......
-
United States v. Kansas City Life Ins Co
...caused. The decisions in Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co., 13 Wall. 166, 20 L.Ed. 557; United States v. Lynah, supra; United States v. Williams, 188 U.S. 485, 23 S.Ct. 363, 47 L.Ed. 554, and same case, C.C., 104 F. 50, 53; United States v. Welch, 217 U.S. 333, 30 S.Ct. 527, 54 L.Ed. 787, 28 L.R.A.......
-
United States v. CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & PR CO.
... ... 445 23 S.Ct. 349, 47 L.Ed. 539 (1903) and cases following it (Williams v. United States, 104 F. 50 (C.C.S.C., 1900), aff'd, 188 U.S. 485 23 S.Ct ... 680; United States v. Grizzard, 219 U.S. 180, 31 S.Ct. 162, 55 L. Ed. 165, 31 L.R.A.,N.S., 1135; Hurley v. Kincaid, 285 ... ...
-
Lea Co. v. North Carolina Bd. of Transp., 397PA82
...nature of the land and make it unsuitable for agriculture, the Supreme Court allowed compensation. E.g., United States v. Williams, 188 U.S. 485, 23 S.Ct. 363, 47 L.Ed. 554 (1903); United States v. Lynah, 188 U.S. 445, 23 S.Ct. 349, 47 L.Ed. 539 The defendant also directs our attention to t......
Request a trial to view additional results