Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: citizenship constitution of india Year: 1900 Page 1 of about 19 results (0.034 seconds)

Feb 26 1900 (FN)

Maxwell Vs. Dow

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-26-1900

..... common property, and the right thus acquired did not come from their citizenship alone, but from their citizenship and property combined. it was, therefore, a property right, and not a mere privilege or immunity of citizenship, and, for that reason, the citizen of one state was not invested by the constitution of the united states with any interest in the common property of the ..... citizens of another state. this was a decision under another section of the constitution (section second of article fourth) from the one under ..... discussion, and it gives to the citizens of each state all privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states, but it is cited for the purpose of showing that, where the privilege or immunity does not rest alone upon citizenship, a citizen of another state ..... the united states and a citizenship of the states, which were distinct from each other, depending upon different characteristics and circumstances in the individual; that it was only privileges and immunities of the citizen of the united states that were placed by the amendment under the protection of the federal constitution, and that the privileges and immunities of a citizen of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 1900 (FN)

Shoshone Mining Co. Vs. Rutter

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-30-1900

..... were not citizens of different states and the suit was not one arising under the constitution or laws of the united states, the federal courts could not take jurisdiction. in the present case, diverse citizenship does not exist. jurisdiction must therefore depend upon the question whether the suit is one ..... which is permissible in the two cases emphasizes the fact that, in the latter case, the controversy may be one not arising under the constitution or laws of congress. again, it is said that congress has in these cases prescribed a specific rule of limitation which is ordinarily different ..... at times controlling the right of possession does not incorporate them into the body of federal law. section 2 of article i of the constitution provides that the electors in each state of members of the house of representatives "shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the ..... arising under the constitution or laws of the united states. we pointed out in the former opinion that it ..... provided that the federal courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction of admiralty and patent litigation, and jurisdiction concurrent with the state courts of suits arising under the constitution or laws of the united states. rev.stat. 629; 25 stat. 433, c. 866. when, in section 2326, rev.stat., congress authorized .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1900 (FN)

Great Southern Fire Proof Hotel Co. Vs. Jones

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-09-1900

..... bill does not make a case arising under the constitution and laws of the united states, it was necessary to set out the citizenship of the individual members of the partnership association of jones & laughlins, limited, which brought this suit. page ..... of a suit by or against a partnership association to the citizenship of the several persons composing such association. nor can we accede to the suggestion that this question of jurisdiction is affected by the clause of the constitution of pennsylvania providing that the term "corporations," as used in ..... . s. 118 , 106 u. s. 120 . the rule that, for purposes of jurisdiction and within the meaning of the clause of the constitution extending the judicial powers of the united states to controversies between citizens of different states, a corporation was to be deemed a citizen of the state ..... association of persons, or an association into a body politic, created by law is a citizen of a state within the meaning of the constitution. and therefore if the defective averment in the declaration had not been otherwise supplied, the suit must have been dismissed." the case of chapman ..... sixth circuit, speaking by judge lurton, held that limited partnership associations organized under the pennsylvania statute were corporations within the jurisdictional requirement of diverse citizenship. for the reasons stated, we are unable to concur in the view taken by that court. we therefore adjudge that, as the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 1900 (FN)

Loeb Vs. Columbia Township Trustees

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-10-1900

..... that, where the plaintiff invokes the jurisdiction of the circuit court solely upon the ground of diverse citizenship, and where the claim of the invalidity of a state statute under the constitution of the united states came from the defendant, or arose after the filing of the petition ..... the jurisdiction of the circuit court is invoked by the plaintiff only on the ground of diverse citizenship, a claim by the defendant of the repugnancy of a state law to the constitution of the united states is not sufficient to give this court jurisdiction, upon writ of error, ..... statute requiring the commissioners to levy the tax and improve the road in question is denied by the defendant. the only provision which the constitution contains with respect to the county commissioners is the following: 'the commissioners of counties, the trustees of townships, and similar boards shall ..... contended that, independently of any question of federal law, the statute of ohio under which the bonds were issued was in violation of the constitution of that state in that, when requiring the defendant township to widen and extend the avenue in question, the legislature exercised administrative, not legislative ..... contention that, independently of any question of federal law, the statute of ohio under which the bonds were issued was in violation of the constitution of that state in that, when requiring the defendant township to widen and extend the avenue in question, the legislature exercised administrative, not .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 1900 (FN)

Sully Vs. American National Bank

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-28-1900

..... state than tennessee, and hence cannot avail himself of the fact of such citizenship in order to claim that his rights as such citizen have been infringed within the meaning of section 2 of article iv of the constitution, declaring that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges ..... proceedings, and the rights asserted by it were adjudicated. if the virginia corporation cannot invoke the protection of the second section of article iv of the constitution of the united states relating to the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, as its co-plaintiffs in error have done, it ..... of tennessee. plaintiff in error carhart also insists that section 5 of the act of 1877 violates section 1 of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution of the united states in that it deprives the nonresident mortgagee of his property without due process of law. we are unable to perceive any ..... renders it valid. that rule applies even though on some other point the statute has been already held to be a violation of the federal constitution. we think the true construction of the statute requires us to hold that the resident owner of a mortgage would be postponed in its payment ..... filing and registration of such valid mortgages or the rendition of such valid judgments. but all such mortgages and judgments shall be valid, and shall constitute a prior lien on the property on which they are or may be charged, as against all debts which may be incurred subsequent to the date .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1900 (FN)

Contzen Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-03-1900

..... oath before some competent authority that he intends to reside permanently in the same, and shall swear to support this constitution, and that he will bear true allegiance to the republic of texas, shall be entitled to all the privileges of citizenship." by section 10, it was provided that "all persons (africans, or descendants of africans, and indians excepted) who were residing ..... in texas on the day of the declaration of independence, shall be considered citizens of the republic and entitled to all the privileges of such." 2 charters and constitution, 1760. the fundamental law of the ..... united states, while aliens were relegated for naturalization to the laws of the united states on that subject. it is true that section two of article three of the state constitution, transmitted to congress in the process of admission, provided that "all free male persons over the age of twenty-one years (indians not taxed, africans, and descendants of africans ..... excepted) who shall have resided six months in texas, immediately preceding the acceptance of this constitution by the congress of the united states shall be deemed qualified electors." but we need not consider the effect of that clause, as contzen did not come within it. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 1900 (FN)

Gableman Vs. Peoria Andc.; Ry. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-10-1900

..... we said: "the bill nowhere asserted a right under the constitution or laws of the united states, but proceeded on common law rights of action. we cannot accept the suggestion that the mere order of a federal ..... in this instance depended on the jurisdiction of the court that entered it, and that jurisdiction, as we have seen, depended exclusively upon the diverse citizenship of the parties to the suits in which the appointment was made. the order, as such, created no liability against defendants, nor did it ..... cases, and we also held that the receiver's orders of appointment were not equivalent to laws of the united states in the meaning of the constitution, and that the mere order of a federal court, sitting in chancery, appointing a receiver did not in itself form adequate ground of jurisdiction. ..... pleading that the suit is one which does really and substantially involve a dispute or controversy as to a right which depends on the construction of the constitution or some law or treaty of the united states before jurisdiction can be maintained. gold-washing & water co. v. keyes, 96 u. s. ..... defendant colvin extended to the operation or maintenance of the gates at the railway crossing. the record does not disclose the place of residence, or the citizenship of hopkins as an individual." "in due time after the commencement of the suit, the defendant, edward o. hopkins, receiver, on his sole petition .....

Tag this Judgment!

1900

Taylor and Marshall Vs. Beckham

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1900

..... agencies or trusts, and not property as such. nor are the salary and emoluments property, secured by contract, but compensation for services actually rendered. nor does the fact that a constitution may forbid the legislature from abolishing a public office or diminishing the salary thereof during the term of the incumbent change its character or make it property. true, the restrictions ..... wall. 321), to take from him 'rights, privileges, and immunities' to which he had been entitled, . . . and to strip him of one of the highest and most valued attributes of citizenship. . . . the word 'deprived' is used in this section in the same sense in which it is used in section 12 of the bill of rights and in the fifth article ..... salaries and emoluments by the aforesaid action of said contest tribunals would be to deprive them of their property without due process of law, contrary to the provisions of the constitution of the united states, and especially of the fourteenth amendment thereof." " * * * *" "defendants say that the power vested in the houses of the general assembly of kentucky to try contests over ..... assembly in such a contest, duly recorded in the journals thereof; that the office of governor or of lieutenant governor was not property in itself, and, moreover, that, under the constitution and laws of kentucky, such determination being an authorized mode of ascertaining the result of an election for governor and lieutenant governor, the persons declared elected to those offices on .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 21 1900 (FN)

Chicago, R.i. and Pac. Ry. Co. Vs. Martin

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-21-1900

..... of texas against an ohio corporation and a united states marshal, the jurisdiction depending as to one defendant on diverse citizenship, and as to the other on the case arising under the constitution and laws of the united states, and the question was whether the judgment of the circuit court of appeals ..... upon that construction. the suit must, in part at least, arise out of a controversy between the parties in regard to the operation and effect of the constitution or laws upon the facts involved. . . . before, therefore, a circuit court can be required to retain a cause under this jurisdiction, it must ..... a joint cause of action against all the defendants, and indeed the removal was applied for on the ground that the suit arose under the constitution and laws of the united states. it therefore came within the first clause of the section quoted, and if the same rule governs proceedings under ..... mr. chief justice fuller delivered the opinion of the court. assuming that, as to the receivers, the case may be said to have arisen under the constitution and laws of the united states, the question is whether it was necessary for the chicago, rock island & pacific railroad company, defendant, to join in ..... for the removal of the cause to the united states circuit court for the district of kansas on the ground that the case arose under the constitution and laws of the united states, which application was overruled by the district court, and the receivers duly excepted. the cause was tried, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1900 (FN)

Florida Central and Peninsular R. Co. Vs. Bell

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-26-1900

..... by way of confession and avoidance, on totally different grounds than those mentioned in the declaration, and which involved no construction or application of the constitution or laws of the united states. it is contended, however, that whether or not the circuit court had jurisdiction to determine the question of ..... in the following passage of its opinion: "there is no effort in this case to found the jurisdiction of the court on the diverse citizenship of the parties. there is nothing in the record to indicate that the judge of the circuit court entertained jurisdiction of the case on that ..... declaration, the jurisdiction of the circuit court would have failed at least as to five of the plaintiffs if that jurisdiction depended solely on the citizenship of the parties. the declaration, however, alleges that the plaintiffs claim title to the land in dispute by virtue of a patent granted to ..... plaintiffs were eight in number, three of whom were alleged to be citizens of the state of texas, and there was no allegation as to the citizenship of the other five. the defendant, the florida central & peninsular railroad company, was alleged to be a corporation organized and existing under the laws ..... the jurisdiction of that court because the parties were citizens of different states, or because the case was alleged to be one arising under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the united states? the action was in ejectment to recover possession of a tract of land in hillsborough county, state .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //