W. H. DONHAM, AS PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, ET. AL., ETC.,

v.

WEST-NELSON MANUFACTURING COMPANY

Citator

Cited By

• W. Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (U.S. 1937)
  …atutes of Arizona and Arkansas were held invalid upon the authority of the Adkins case. The Justices who had! dissented in that case bowed to the ruling and Mr. Justice Brandeis dissented. Murphy v. Sardell, 269 U. S. 530; Donham v. West-Nelson Co., 273 U. S. 657. The question did not come before us again until the last . term in the Morehead case, as already noted. In that case, briefs supporting the New York statute were submitted by the States of Ohio, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,…
• Cline v. Frink Dairy Co., 274 U.S. 445 (U.S. 1927)
  …e criterion in such cases is to examine whether common social duty would, under the circumstances, have suggested a more circumspect conduct.’ 1 East P. C. 262”. Following the authority in the Nash case, we sustained in Miller v. Oregon, per curiam, 273 U. S. 657, a conviction of manslaughter under a statute of Oregon, which made the following rule of conduct a standard of criminality: [*465] “Every person operating a motor vehicle on, the public highways of this state shall drive the same in a careful and p…
• Gorin v. United States, 312 U.S. 19 (U.S. 1941)
  …ade); Omaechevarria v. Idaho, 246 U. S. 343, 345, 348 (“any cattle range previously . . . or . . . usually occupied by any cattle grower”); Hygrade Provision Co. v. Sherman, 266 U. S. 497, 501-503 (meat represented to be “kosher”); Miller v. Oregon, 273 U. S. 657 (dangerous rate of speed; see 274 U. S. at 464-465); United States v. Alford, 274 U. S. 264, 267 (building fires “near” any forest or inflammable material); United States v. Wurzbach, 280 U. S. 396, 399 (receiving contributions for “any political pu…

Authorities Cited

• Adkins v. Child's. Hosp. of the Dist. of Columbia, 261 U.S. 525 (U.S. 1923)
• Whitney v. The People of the State of Cal., 269 U.S. 530 (U.S. 1925)