BONDHOLDERS, INC.

v.

POWELL ET AL., RECEIVERS, ET AL.; CHIARELLI ET AL. V. UNITED STATES; ADERMAN V. UNITED STATES; FISHBAUGH V. ARMOUR & CO. ET AL.; PRIDGEN V. BUBELLA ET AL.; DIXON V. ROBINSON, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Fed. Mar. Bd. v. Isbrandtsen Co., Inc., 356 U.S. 481 (U.S. 1958)
  …Brief for Petitioner, pp. 47-56, United States Navigation Co. v. Cunard S. S. Co., 284 U. S. 474; Brief for United States, pp. 22-23 (incorporating by reference Brief for United States, pp. 21-45, A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi v. Isbrandtsen Co., 342 U. S. 950), Far East Conference v. United States, 342 U. S. 570. See also United States Navigation Co. v. Cunard S. S. Co., 284 U. S. 474, 478 (argument of petitioner’s counsel). And in Far East Conference, the claim that now prevails was a main ground of dis…
• Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 354 F.2d 608 (2d Cir. 1965)
  …09, 283 F. 2d 204, 224, 226, cert. denied, 364 U.S. 913, 81 S.Ct. 276 (1960); Isbrandtsen Co. v. United States, 96 F.Supp. 883, 892 (S.D. N.Y.1951), aff’d by an equally divided court, A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi v. Isbrandtsen Co., 342 U.S. 950, 72 S.Ct. 623, 96 L.Ed. 706 (1952); Friendly, The Federal Administrative Agencies 144 (1962); Landis, The Administrative Process 36-46 (1938); cf. City of Pittsburgh v. Federal Power Comm., 99 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 237 F. 2d 741 (1956). [*621] In Michigan Consolidate…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Hernandez, 290 F.2d 86 (2d Cir. 1961)
  …s adequate evidence of his power to determine custody. Other circuits have followed the Cohen case doctrine: United States v. Chiarelli, 7 Cir., 1951, 192 F. 2d 528, certiorari denied 342 U.S. 913, 72 S.Ct. 359, 96 L.Ed. 683, rehearing denied 1952, 342 U.S. 950, 72 S.Ct. 551, 96 L.Ed. 706; Brown v. United States, 9 Cir., 1955, 222 F. 2d 293; Alexander v. United States, 8 Cir., 1957, 241 F. 2d 351, certiorari denied 354 U.S. 940, 77 S.Ct. 1405, 1 L.Ed.2d 1539, rehearing denied 1957, 355 U.S. 852, 78 S.Ct. 7…