Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: recent Court: us supreme court Year: 1968 Page 1 of about 38 results (0.055 seconds)

Apr 01 1968 (FN)

Hogue Vs. Southern Railway Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-01-1968

..... of appeals of the state of georgia and remand the case for further appropriate proceedings. * section 5, as set forth in 45 u.s.c. 55, is as follows: "any contract, rule, regulation, or device whatsoever, the purpose or intent of which shall be to enable any common carrier to exempt itself from any liability created by this chapter, shall to ..... by virtue of any of the provisions of this chapter, such common carrier may set off therein any sum it has contributed or paid to any insurance, relief benefit, or indemnity" that may have been paid to the injured employee or the person entitled thereto on account of the injury or death for which said action was brought.

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1968 (FN)

Penn-central Merger Cases

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-15-1968

..... inequitably, recourse may be had to the commission for relief pursuant to its reserved jurisdiction, subject to judicial review. with respect to the contention that, regardless of whether the indemnity provisions constitute a revenue pool, those provisions will induce the protected carriers and penn-central improperly to divert traffic to one another and thereby to injure the unprotected roads, the ..... be significantly lessened." an accompanying footnote reads: "shapp's contentions that competition would be substantially curtailed and that rail facilities in the eastern and western portions of pennsylvania would be contracted are predicated on the merger of both e-l and d & h into n & w. however, the merger of e-l into n & w is not authorized herein [ ..... , even if we consider the section applicable in these circumstances, there is no merit to the contention that the protective conditions must be struck down. section 5(1) proscribes "any contract, agreement, or combination [among] . . . carriers for the pooling or division of traffic, or of service, or of gross or net earnings, or of any portion thereof" unless the ..... types: traffic conditions that require the merged penn-central not to change routes, rates, or service in such a way as to divert traffic from the protected lines, and revenue indemnity conditions establishing a formula whereby penn-central is to compensate the protected lines in the event of adverse revenue results following the merger. [ footnote 5 ] at the time the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 1968 (FN)

Shuttle Corp. Vs. Washington Transit Comm'n

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-25-1968

..... or to suspect that the congress, in creating the wmatc, disturbed the exclusivity of the secretary's control over the mall either by extinguishing entirely his power to contract for transportation services or by burdening the concessionaire with two separate agencies engaged in regulating precisely the same aspects of its conduct. congress was endeavoring to simplify the ..... maintaining our national parks, and for providing facilities and services for their public enjoyment through concessionaires or otherwise. [ footnote 1 ] in meeting this responsibility, he has contracted for petitioner to conduct guided tours of the mall, a grassy park located in the center of the city of washington and studded with national monuments and museums. ..... , that the interstate compact under which it was established to centralize responsibility over mass transit service in the washington metropolitan area implicitly limits the secretary's power to contract for provision of tour services by a concessionaire uncertified by wmatc. wmatc-certified carriers furnishing mass transit and sightseeing services in washington, including d.c. transit system, ..... to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit syllabus respondent washington metropolitan area transit commission (wmatc) sued to enjoin petitioner, a concessionaire under contract with the secretary of the interior, from operating "minibus" guided tours of the mall, a park area in the center of washington, d.c. without obtaining .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 1968 (FN)

United States Vs. Phosphate Export Assn.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-25-1968

..... essence, furnishing fertilizer to korea. aid selected the commodity, determined the amount to be purchased, controlled the contracting process, and paid the bill. the foreign elements in the transactions were, by comparison, insignificant. page 393 u. s. 209 it stretches neither the language nor the ..... look at the economic reality of the relevant transactions. here, although the fertilizer shipments were consigned to korea, and although, in most cases, korea formally let the contracts, american participation was the overwhelmingly dominant feature. the burden of noncompetitive pricing fell not on any foreign purchaser, but on the american taxpayer. the united states was, in ..... agency for international development (aid), the state department agency in charge of the foreign aid program, amended its regulations to preclude webb-pomerene associations from bidding on certain procurement contracts whenever procurement was limited to united states suppliers. [ footnote 3 ] according to appellees, this new regulation made it uneconomical for the association to continue in operation, [ ..... 11 sales by the association of concentrated phosphate to the republic of korea under the united states foreign aid program. in two cases, the government itself let the contracts, and the remaining nine were let by an agency of the korean government. the agency for international development (aid) retained effective control over the transactions, from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1968 (FN)

Jones Vs. Alfred H. Mayer Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-17-1968

..... secured by it are deprived of the privilege to go and come when they please, to buy and sell when they please, to make contracts and enforce contracts, i give notice that, if no one else does, i shall introduce a bill and urge its passage through congress that will secure ..... [ footnote 3/6 ] were inapplicable because "they, like the constitutional amendment under whose sanction they were enacted, do not in any manner prohibit or invalidate contracts entered into page 392 u. s. 452 by private individuals in respect to the control and disposition of their own property." id. at 271 u. s. ..... itself to that narrow question, the court said that none of the provisions relied upon by the appellants prohibited private individuals from "enter[ing] into . . . [contracts] in respect to the control and disposition of their own property." id. at 271 u. s. 331 . nor, added the court, had the appellants even ..... fundamental rights": "the right to acquire property, the right to go and come at pleasure, the right to enforce rights in the courts, to make contracts, and to inherit and dispose of property. [ footnote 53 ]" as to those basic civil rights, the senator said, the bill would "break down ..... previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, . . . shall have the same right, in every state and territory in the united states, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1968 (FN)

King Vs. Smith

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-17-1968

king v. smith - 392 u.s. 309 (1968) u.s. supreme court king v. smith, 392 u.s. 309 (1968) king v. smith no. 949 argued april 23, 1968 decided june 17, 1968 392 u.s. 309 appeal from the united states district court for the middle district of alabama syllabus under the aid to families with dependent children program (afdc) established by the social security act of 1935 funds are made available for a "dependent child" largely by the federal government, on a matching fund basis, with the participating state administering the program in conformity with the act and regulations of the department of health, education, and welfare (hew). section 406(a) of the act defines a "dependent child" as one who has been deprived of "parental" support or care by reason of the death, continued absence, or incapacity of a "parent," and, insofar as relevant in this case, aid can be granted under the provision only if a "parent" of the needy child is continually absent from the home. the act requires that "aid to families with dependent children shall be furnished with reasonable promptness to all eligible individuals. . . ." 42 u.s.c. 602(a)(9). alabama, which, like all other states, participates in the afdc program, in 1964 promulgated its "substitute father" regulation under which afdc payments are denied to the children of a mother who "cohabits" in or outside her home with an able-bodied man, a "substitute father" being considered a nonabsent parent within the federal statute. the regulation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1968 (FN)

American Lines Vs. Louisville and N. R. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-17-1968

american lines v. louisville & n. r. co. - 392 u.s. 571 (1968) u.s. supreme court american lines v. louisville & n. r. co., 392 u.s. 571 (1968) american lines v. louisville & nashville railroad co. no. 797 argued april 23-24, 1968 decided june 17, 1968 * 392 u.s. 571 appeal from the united states district court for the western district of kentucky syllabus since 1953, ingot molds have moved almost exclusively by combination barge-truck service from neville island and pittsburgh, pa. to steelton, ky. the overall service charge since 1960 has been $5.11 per ton. in 1963, appellees pennsylvania railroad and the louisville & nashville railroad, in order to compete for this traffic, lowered their joint rate from $11.86 to $5.11 per ton. the barge lines, joined by intervening trucking interests, protested to the interstate commerce commission (icc) that the new railroad rate impaired or destroyed the barge-truck service's "inherent advantage," and thus violated 15a(3) of the interstate commerce act and the national transportation policy. under 15a(3), a carrier's rates "shall not be held up to a particular level to protect the traffic of any other mode of transportation, giving due consideration to the objectives of the national transportation policy declared in this act." the congressional intent stated in the national transportation policy is to provide for fair regulation of all transportation modes subject to the act, administered so as to preserve "the inherent advantage of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1968 (FN)

Lee Vs. Florida

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-17-1968

lee v. florida - 392 u.s. 378 (1968) u.s. supreme court lee v. florida, 392 u.s. 378 (1968) lee v. florida no. 174 argued may 2, 1968 decided june 17, 1968 392 u.s. 378 certiorari to the district court of appeal of florida, fourth district syllabus a four-party telephone line was installed in petitioner lee's house, and, shortly thereafter, by direction of the orlando, florida, police, a telephone in a neighboring house was connected to the same party line. the police attached equipment which permitted them to hear and record all conversations on the party line without lifting the telephone receiver. recordings of conversations were introduced, over objection, at petitioners' trial for violation of state lottery laws. petitioners were convicted, and the state appellate court affirmed, saying "that there were no state or federal statutes applicable in florida which would make wiretapping illegal and inadmissible in evidence. . . ." held: 1. the conduct of the orlando police clearly amounted to interception of petitioners' communications within the meaning of 605 of the federal communications act of 1934, which prohibits the interception and divulgence (conceded here) of any communication without the sender's authorization. pp. 392 u. s. 380 -382. 2. the recordings of the illegally intercepted conversations were not admissible in evidence in the florida courts in view of the express federal prohibition against divulgence of recordings so procured. schwartz v. texas, 344 u. s. .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 20 1968 (FN)

First Nat'l Bank Vs. Cities Service Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-20-1968

..... of the entire iranian oil industry (or a substantial portion thereof) in place of anglo-iranian, and to compensate waldron for what would amount to a transfer of his contract rights. the evidence further showed that cities went to substantial lengths to explore the possibilities presented by petitioner. waldron, at jones' request, secured an invitation for jones, together ..... concession rights. while the dispute between anglo-iranian and the iranian government under premier mossadegh was still continuing, waldron and some of his associates allegedly succeeded in obtaining a contract to purchase 15,000,000 metric tons of crude oil or refined products from the national iranian oil co. (nioc), the company formed to take over anglo-iranian' ..... made whereby all the oil companies, including cities, shared almost all the iranian oil production, and that the boycott conspiracy frustrated petitioner's ability to sell oil under his contract. the trial judge granted defense motions to postpone answering the complaint pending the taking of petitioner's deposition, and meanwhile petitioner was stayed from any discovery of his own ..... those companies with conspiring to boycott iranian oil until iran agreed to return anglo-iranian's properties which it had nationalized in 1951 alleging: that petitioner had a favorable contract to purchase iranian oil over a five-year period; that negotiations had been conducted with cities for its participation in the operation of the iranian oil industry; that .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 20 1968 (FN)

Joint Industry Board Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-20-1968

..... such salesmen, whether or not they are independent contractors selling the products or services of the bankrupt on a commission basis, with or without a drawing account or formal contract. . . ." [ footnote 2 ] the cases in the lower courts are in agreement as to the purpose of 64a(2). see 3 collier on bankruptcy ? 64 ..... before us is whether priority under 64a(2) must be accorded to an employer's unpaid contributions to an employees' annuity plan established by a collective bargaining contract. the referee and the district court denied the priority, and the court of appeals affirmed. in re a & s electric corp., 379 f.2d 211 ..... to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit syllabus an employer's unpaid contributions to an employees' annuity plan established by a collective bargaining contract are not entitled to a priority under 64a(2) of the bankruptcy act, which grants priority, limited to $600 and to wages earned within three ..... suffer the hardship of accepting a job outside the electrical industry or with an employer who is not covered by the collective bargaining contract and annuity plan. of course, if an employee does choose, upon the bankruptcy of his employer, to seek work with an employer not covered ..... by the contract, he ceases to participate in the annuity plan and may, under the terms of that plan, claim the monies that have accrued in his .....

Tag this Judgment!


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