Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt, No. 302

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtBLACK
Citation354 U.S. 416,77 S.Ct. 1360,1 L.Ed.2d 1456
PartiesCornelius VANDERBILT, Jr., Petitioner, v. Patricia W. VANDERBILT and Thomas F. McCoy, Receiver and Sequestrator
Docket NumberNo. 302
Decision Date24 June 1957
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
344 practice notes
  • Ralph v. Pepersack, No. 9176.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • July 16, 1964
    ...Trilling v. United States, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 159, 260 F. 2d 677, 700-701 (D.C.Cir. 1958) (opinion by Judge Prettyman). 17 At 354 U.S. 455, 77 S.Ct. 1360, the Court stated that "circumstances may justify a brief delay between arrest and arraignment, as for instance, where the story volunteere......
  • Holmes v. Scully, No. CV-87-1715.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • February 15, 1989
    ...held that Rule 5(a) forbids a delay which is "of a nature to give opportunity for the extraction of a confession." Id., 354 U.S. at 455, 77 S.Ct. at 1360. However, the McNabb-Mallory rule, since it is supervisory and not constitutional in nature, is inapplicable to state prosecutions. Galle......
  • Estate of Hackler v. Hackler, Record No. 1827-03-2.
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals of Virginia
    • September 21, 2004
    ...over the person of the defendant.'" Hayes v. Hayes, 3 Va.App. 499, 505, 351 S.E.2d 590, 593 (1986) (quoting Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt, 354 U.S. 416, 418, 77 S.Ct. 1360, 1362, 1 L.Ed.2d 1456 (1957)). "No order can be made directly binding on a person unless he is properly in court, neither ca......
  • Atkinson v. Superior Court In and For Los Angeles County
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • November 5, 1957
    ...his own obligation as property where he is, when his purpose is to terminate a nonresdent's claim against him (Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt, 354 U.S. 416, 77 S.Ct. 1360, 1 L.Ed.2d 1456; Estin v. Estin, 334 U.S. 541, 68 S.Ct. 1213, 92 L.Ed. 1561), and they contend that the rule is the same when ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
343 cases
  • Ralph v. Pepersack, No. 9176.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • July 16, 1964
    ...Trilling v. United States, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 159, 260 F. 2d 677, 700-701 (D.C.Cir. 1958) (opinion by Judge Prettyman). 17 At 354 U.S. 455, 77 S.Ct. 1360, the Court stated that "circumstances may justify a brief delay between arrest and arraignment, as for instance, where the story volunteere......
  • Holmes v. Scully, No. CV-87-1715.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • February 15, 1989
    ...held that Rule 5(a) forbids a delay which is "of a nature to give opportunity for the extraction of a confession." Id., 354 U.S. at 455, 77 S.Ct. at 1360. However, the McNabb-Mallory rule, since it is supervisory and not constitutional in nature, is inapplicable to state prosecutions. Galle......
  • Estate of Hackler v. Hackler, Record No. 1827-03-2.
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals of Virginia
    • September 21, 2004
    ...over the person of the defendant.'" Hayes v. Hayes, 3 Va.App. 499, 505, 351 S.E.2d 590, 593 (1986) (quoting Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt, 354 U.S. 416, 418, 77 S.Ct. 1360, 1362, 1 L.Ed.2d 1456 (1957)). "No order can be made directly binding on a person unless he is properly in court, neither ca......
  • Atkinson v. Superior Court In and For Los Angeles County
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • November 5, 1957
    ...his own obligation as property where he is, when his purpose is to terminate a nonresdent's claim against him (Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt, 354 U.S. 416, 77 S.Ct. 1360, 1 L.Ed.2d 1456; Estin v. Estin, 334 U.S. 541, 68 S.Ct. 1213, 92 L.Ed. 1561), and they contend that the rule is the same when ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Voting Fluidity and the Attitudinal Model of Supreme Court Decision Making
    • United States
    • Political Research Quarterly Nbr. 44-1, March 1991
    • March 1, 1991
    ...that overruled precedent, the cumulative scale to which they pertain, and the shifting justices are as follows: Vanderbilt v. Vanderbilt, 354 U. S. 416 who were ideologically closer to the other dissenters than they were toany member of the majority. The exception was Frankfurter, one ofthe......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT