GRAY, DIRECTOR OF THE BITUMINOUS COAL DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL.
v.
POWELL ET AL., RECEIVERS
GRAY, DIRECTOR OF THE BITUMINOUS COAL DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL.
POWELL ET AL., RECEIVERS
312 U.S. 666
Supreme Court of the United States (1941)
Negative Treatment
Also reported at: 85 L. Ed. 1111 · 61 S. Ct. 824 · SCDB 1940-171 · 1941 U.S. LEXIS 1308
Cited by 38 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Offshore Co. & The Fid. & Cas. Co. of N.Y. v. Johnie M. Robison, 266 F.2d 769 (5th Cir. 1959)…r’s determination that the plaintiff there was not a member of a crew, and sustained it only after concluding that it was supported by the evidence. Further, the Court’s citation of Bassett in Cantey v. McLain Line, Inc., 312 U.S. 667, 61 S.Ct. 829, 85 L.Ed. 1111, supra, would seem in context to imply that the Court regarded the result in Bassett as reflecting its own independent determination as to the status of the petitioner there, rather than as a decision passing merely on the scope of judicial review t…
-
Affronti v. United States, 145 F.2d 3 (8th Cir. 1944)…e,” as used in a taxing statute, meant “sale” in its legal sense and did not include a forfeiture of land for taxes, where the owner received no consideration for the forfeiture. The Supreme Court of the United States, in 312 U.S. 666, 61 S.Ct. 827, 85 L.Ed. 1111, without hearing argument, reversed the decision of this Court in the case referred to, in a per curiam opinion. We think that the word “sale” in the statute which makes it unlawful to sell contraband narcotics was ttsed in its ordinary and popular…
-
United States v. Armature Rewinding Co., 124 F.2d 589 (8th Cir. 1942)…, 404, 61 S.Ct. 659, 85 L.Ed. 913, and compare Rheinstrom v. Commissioner, 8 Cir., 105 F. 2d 642, 647, 124 A.L.R. 861; compare, Helvering v. Nebraska Bridge Supply & Lumber Co., 8 Cir., 115 F. 2d 288, reversed per curiam, 312 U.S. 666, 61 S.Ct. 827, 85 L.Ed. 1111 with Helvering v. Hammel, 311 U.S. 504, 61 S.Ct. 368, 85 L.Ed. 303, 131 A.L.R. 1481, and Electro-Chemical Engraving Co. v. Commissioner, 311 U.S. 513, 61 S.Ct. 372, 85 L.Ed. 308. Compare, also, United States v. Stewart, 311 U.S. 60, 61 S.Ct. 102, 85…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence