JOSEPH ET AL.

v.

INDIANA

Citator

Cited By

• Dick v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co., 359 U.S. 437 (U.S. 1959)
  …, 10Í-102.. See also United States v. Knight, 336 U. S. 505, 509 (dissenting opinion). Nor. need we rummage in the recesses of our memories: see Triplett v. Iowa, 357 U. S. 217; Hinkle v. New England Mutual Ins. Co., 358 U. S. 65; Joseph v. Indiana, 359 U. S. 117. See Houston Oil Co. v. Goodrich, 245 U. S. 440. In Lutcher & Moore Lumber Co. v. Knight, 217 U. S. 257, 267-268, the Court said: “The great purpose of the act of 1891, however, to which all its provisions are subservient, is to distribute.the juri…
• Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Shipping Corp., 361 U.S. 107 (U.S. 1959)
  …of certiorari even after oral argument, when the true basis for a certiorari was lacking. Even in criminal cases [*113] involving sentences of life imprisonment this practice has been followed. See Triplett v. Iowa, 357 U. S. 217; Joseph v. Indiana, 359 U. S. 117. Again to quote Mr. Chief Justice Taft in Layne & Bowler Corp. v. Western Well Works, Inc., supra, at 393, “it is very important that we be consistent in not granting the writ of certio- rari . . . .” As a general practice the Court does not review…
• Needelman v. United States, 362 U.S. 600 (U.S. 1960)
  …ssing through the preliminary sifting process, did not survive the scrutiny of oral argument. See the cases collected in Rice v. Sioux City Cemetery, 349 U. S. 70, 77-78, and, [*601] more recently, Triplett v. Iowa, 357 U. S. 217, Joseph v. Indiana, 359 U. S. 117, and Phillips v. New York, ante, p. 456. But this is not one of them. The specific questions which were presented by the petition for certiorari are not now found to be frivolous nor do they raise disputed questions of fact, nor does the record othe…

Authorities Cited

• United States v. McNinch, 355 U.S. 948 (U.S. 1958)