DOCSLIB.ORG

Supreme Court of the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supreme Court of the United States ; MONDAY, OCTOBEE 5, 1931 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Present: The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Holmes, Mr. Justice Van Devanter, Mr. Justice McReynolds, Mr. Justice Brandeis, Mr. Jus- tice Sutherland, Mr. Justice Butler, Mr. Justice Stone, and Mr. Jus- tice Roberts. Dayton E. Van Vactor, of Klamath Falls, Oreg. ; Charles L. Carr, of Kansas City, Mo. ; Martin Sack, of Jacksonville, Fla. ; James B. Searcy, of Springfield, 111. ; D. Niel Ferguson, of Ocala, Fla. ; Alonzo H. Garcelon, of Boston, Mass. ; David W. Jacobs, of Boston, Mass. Alma M. Myers, of San Francisco, Calif. ; Norman A. Bailie, of Los Angeles, Calif. Harpole, of Superior, Mont. ; Lon E. Blank- ; Eugene enbecker, of Houston, Tex.; John F. Sharp, jr., of Oklahoma City, Okla. ; J. Andrew West, of Prescott, Ariz. ; Elbert Hooper, of Fort Worth, Tex. ; and J. Mark Trice, of Washington, D. C, were admitted to practice. No. 41. Painters District Council No. 14 of Chicago, etc., appel- lants, v. The United States of America. Suggestion of a diminu- tion of the record and motion for a writ of certiorari submitted by Mr. Solicitor General Thacher for the appellee. No. 287. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company et al., appellants, v. The United States of America et al. Joint motion to advance submitted by Mr. Solicitor General Thacher in that behalf. No. 391. T. Binford et al., appellants, v. J. H. McLeaish & Com- pany et al. Motion to advance submitted by Mr. A. L. Reed for the appellants. No. 263, October term, 1930. Maas & Waldstein Company, peti- tioner, v. The United States of America. Leave granted to file brief of Hugh Satterlee and Rollin Browne as amid curiae, on mo- tion of Mr. Hugh Satterlee and Mr. Rollin Browne in that behalf. No. 98. Arizona Grocery Company, petitioner, v. The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company et al. Leave granted to file brief of the Interstate Commerce Commission as amicus curiae on motion of Mr. H. L. Underwood in that behalf. 79704—31 1 MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 19 31 2 No. 98. Arizona Grocery Company, petitioner, v. The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company et al. Leave granted to file brief of the Arizona Corporation Commission as amicus cwriae on motion of Mr. John E. Benton in that behalf. No. 60. Chicago and North Western Railway Company, petitioner, v. Eugene Bolle. Suggestion of a diminution of the record and motion for a writ of certiorari submitted by Mr. John P. Bramhall for the respondent. No. 331. Manuel V. Domenech, Treasurer of Porto Rico, peti- tioner, v. Porto Rican Leaf Tobacco Company. Leave granted to file brief of respondent on motion of Mr. Dean G. Acheson with leave to petitioner to file a reply brief within three days on motion of Mr. William Cattron Rigby in that behalf. No. 218. Winchester Manufacturing Company, petitioner, v. The United States. Motion to remand submitted by Mr. F. S. Bright for the petitioner in support thereof, and by Mr. Solicitor General Thacher, Mr. Assistant Attorney General Rugg, Mr. Whitney North Seymour, and Mr. James A. Cosgrove for the respondent in opposition thereto. No. 285. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., petitioner, v. General Electric Company et al. Motion for leave to file brief of Radio- logical Society of North America and Radiological Research Insti- tute, Inc., as amid curiae, submitted by Mr. Seward Davis in that behalf and the motion denied. No. 434. Roy Marx et al., appellants, v. Charles R. Maybury, as Director of Licenses for the State of Washington, et al. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western Dis- trict of Washington. Docketed and dismissed on motion of Mr. Blaine Mallon in behalf of counsel for the appellee. No. 263, October term, 1930. Maas &> Waldstein Company, peti- tioner, v. The United States. Leave granted to file brief of Ward Loveless, as amicus curiae, on motion of Mr. Ward Loveless in that behalf. No. 16, original. The United States of America, complainant, v. State of Oregon. Leave granted to file amended answer of respond- ent on motion of Mr. J. Mark Trice for the respondent. No. 17, original. The State of Washington, complainant, v. The State of Oregon. Leave granted to file answer of respondent on motion of Mr. J. Mark Trice for the respondent. No. 300. Southern Railway Company, appellant, v. Common- wealth of Kentucky; and No. 301. Andrew W. Mellon, Director General of Railroads, ap- pellant, v. Commonwealth of Kentucky. Motion to advance sub- mitted by Mr. C. C. Calhoun for the appellants. ; MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 19 31 3 No. 454, October term, 1930. John M. Brandt, Company, peti- tioner, v. The United States. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing submitted by Mr. David J. Shorb for the petitioner. No. 361. Nicola Ranieri, petitioner, v. S. D. Smith, District Di- rector in charge of Immigration, etc. Motion to consider petition for writ of certiorari on imprinted papers submitted by Mr. John H. Chumbley for the petitioner. No. 265. L. A. Nixon, petitioner, v. James Condon and C. H. Kolle. Leave granted to file brief of C. N. Love, Julius White, and others as amid curiae on motion of Mr. J. Alston Atkins in that behalf. No. — . In the matter of the Disbarment of William E. Baff. Report of the Committee of the Bar presented. No. original. Ex parte: James Edward Murphy, petitioner. — , Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus submitted by Mr. James Edward Murphy pro se. No. original. Ex parte: Richard Husty, petitioner. Motion — , for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus submitted by Mr. Percy F. Parrott for the petitioner. No. 5, original. The State of Wisconsin et al., complainants, v. The State of Illinois, et al. No. 8, original. The State of Michigan et al., complainants, v. The State of Illinois et al. ; and No. 9, original. The State of New York et al., complainants, v. The State of Illinois et al. Semiannual report of the defendants as to progress made, dated July 1, 1931, presented. No. 11, original. Commonwealth of Kentucky, complainant, v. State of Indiana et al. Report No. 3 of the defendant, State of Indiana, dated August 29, 1931, presented. No. 358. T. E. Clemmons, Executor of the Estate of E. B. Slaton, appellant, v. A. L. Hall, Administrator of the Estate of Carl Hall. Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia. Dis- missed on motion of counsel for the appellant. No. 47. Rocky Brook Mills Company, petitioner, v. The United States. Motion to remand submitted by Mr. John Phillip Hill for the petitioner in support thereof and by Mr. Solicitor General Thacher, Mr. Assistant Attorney General Rugg, Mr. Claude R. Branch, and Mr. R. C. Williamson for the respondent in opposition thereto. No. 351. S. P. Knut, Individually, etc., et al., petitioners, v. Pat- rick Henry, Executor, etc. ; and No. 352. S. P. Knut, Individually, etc., et al., petitioners, v. Eliza- beth H. Forsyth et al. Motions to dismiss submitted by Mr. Gerard Brandon for the respondents. MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1931 4 No. 123. Joseph Vallanvanti, petitioner, v. Armour & Company. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis submitted by Mr. Asa P. French for the petitioner. No. 126. Leonard Fernandez, petitioner, v. Harry M. Kaiser, as Warden of Clinton Prison, Dannemora, N. Y. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis submitted by Mr. Leonard Fernandez pro se. No. 144. Max Leibowitz et al., petitioners, v. The United States of America. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis sub- mitted by Mr. Max Leibowitz pro se. No. 166. Cammillus Soleau et al., petitioners, v. Josephine Soleau et al. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis submitted by Mr. Howard Lewis for the petitioners. No. 220. Ida E. Tutson, petitioner, v. Joseph F. Holland et al. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis submitted by Mr. Elwood G. Hubert for the petitioner. No. 410. Glen E. Minnick, Administrator, etc., petitioner, v. South- ern Eailway Company. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pau- peris submitted by Mr. Paul Dulaney for the petitioner. No. 47. Eocky Brook Mills Company, petitioner, v. The United States. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Claims sub- mitted by Mr. John Phillip Hill for the petitioner, and by Mr. Solicitor General Thacher, Mr. Assistant Attorney General Eugg, Mr. Claude E. Branch, and Mr. E. C. Williamson for the respondent. No. 61. Earl L. Fisher et al., petitioners, v. Scott Eedfield and Berwick B. Wood, copartners, etc., et al. Petition for writ of certio- rari to the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon submitted by Mr. I. H. Van Winkle and Mr. Willis S. Moore for the petitioners, and by Mr. Erskine Wood for the respondents. No. 62. American Hide and Leather Company, petitioner, v. The United States. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Claims submitted by Mr. William E. Hayes and Mr. George E. Hamilton for the petitioner, and by Mr. Solicitor General Thacher, Mr. As- sistant Attorney General Eugg. Mr. Claude E. Branch, and Mr. George H. Foster for the respondent. No. 65. Willie Tiger and Alexander George, petitioners, v. Emory Timmons et al. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma submitted by Mr. Creekmore Wallace for the petitioners, and by Mr. Thomas J. Flannelly for the respondents. No. 70. M. Hohenberg et al., co-partners, etc., petitioners, v. Louis- ville & Nashville Eailroad Company. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit submitted by Mr.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mccormick Foundation Civics Program Freedom of Speech: Clear & Present Danger
    McCormick Foundation Civics Program 2010 First Amendment Summer Institute Freedom of Speech: Clear & Present Danger Shawn Healy Director of Educational Programs Civics Program Freedom of Speech o First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law…abridging…the freedom of speech…” o An historic progression of free speech tests: • Bad tendency -Rooted in English Common Law and articulated in Gitlow v. New York (1925) • Clear and present danger -First articulated by Holmes in Schenck v. U.S. (1919), and adopted by a majority of the Court in Herndon v. Lowry (1937) • Imminent lawless action -Supplants clear and present danger test in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) -Exception: speech cases in military courts Bad Tendency Test o World War I: Used as test to determine whether speech critical of government during the war and its aftermath crossed the line o Sedition Act of 1917: • Congress intended to forestall threats to military operations • The Wilson Administration used to prohibit dissenting views • Shaffer v. U.S. (9th Circuit Court of Appeals): “It is true that disapproval of war and the advocacy of peace are not crimes under the Espionage Act; but the question here is…whether the natural and probable tendency and effect of the words…are such as are calculated to produce the result condemned by the statute.” Bad Tendency Test Continued o Abrams v. U.S. (1919): • Pamphlet critical of Wilson’s decision to send troops to Russia, urging U.S. workers to strike in protest • Charged under 1918 amendment to Sedition Act prohibiting expression of disloyalty and interference with the war effort • Downplayed clear and present danger distinction: “for the language of these circulars was obviously intended to provoke and to encourage resistance to the United States and the war.” Bad Tendency Test Continued o Gitlow v.
    [Show full text]
  • Campaign and Transition Collection: 1928
    HERBERT HOOVER PAPERS CAMPAIGN LITERATURE SERIES, 1925-1928 16 linear feet (31 manuscript boxes and 7 card boxes) Herbert Hoover Presidential Library 151 Campaign Literature – General 152-156 Campaign Literature by Title 157-162 Press Releases Arranged Chronologically 163-164 Campaign Literature by Publisher 165-180 Press Releases Arranged by Subject 181-188 National Who’s Who Poll Box Contents 151 Campaign Literature – General California Elephant Campaign Feature Service Campaign Series 1928 (numerical index) Cartoons (2 folders, includes Satterfield) Clipsheets Editorial Digest Editorials Form Letters Highlights on Hoover Booklets Massachusetts Elephant Political Advertisements Political Features – NY State Republican Editorial Committee Posters Editorial Committee Progressive Magazine 1928 Republic Bulletin Republican Feature Service Republican National Committee Press Division pamphlets by Arch Kirchoffer Series. Previously Marked Women's Page Service Unpublished 152 Campaign Literature – Alphabetical by Title Abstract of Address by Robert L. Owen (oversize, brittle) Achievements and Public Services of Herbert Hoover Address of Acceptance by Charles Curtis Address of Acceptance by Herbert Hoover Address of John H. Bartlett (Herbert Hoover and the American Home), Oct 2, 1928 Address of Charles D., Dawes, Oct 22, 1928 Address by Simeon D. Fess, Dec 6, 1927 Address of Mr. Herbert Hoover – Boston, Massachusetts, Oct 15, 1928 Address of Mr. Herbert Hoover – Elizabethton, Tennessee. Oct 6, 1928 Address of Mr. Herbert Hoover – New York, New York, Oct 22, 1928 Address of Mr. Herbert Hoover – Newark, New Jersey, Sep 17, 1928 Address of Mr. Herbert Hoover – St. Louis, Missouri, Nov 2, 1928 Address of W. M. Jardine, Oct. 4, 1928 Address of John L. McNabb, June 14, 1928 Address of U.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    FOURTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS LAKE SHORE MICHIGAN SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY TO THIE STOCKHOLDERS FOR THE Fiscal im ending Dec. 31, f: CLEVELAND, O. SHORT 4 FORMAN, PRINTERS AND STATIONERS, 1884. FOURTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company STOCKHOLDERS Fiscal Year ending Dec, 31, 1883. CLEVELAND, O.: SHORT <fc FOBMAN, PRINTERS AND STATIONERS, 1884. ORGANIZATION Lake Shore & Michigan Southern RAILWAY COMPANY, May r, 1884* DIEEOTOBS. (13 J ANNUAL MEETING FIRST WEDNESDAY IN MAY. ' WILLIAM H. VANDERBILT ..New York. CORNELIUS VANDERBILT New York. WILLIAM K. VANDERBILT New York. SAMUEL F. BARGER New York. JOHN E. BURRILL New York. DARIUS O. MILLS ...New York. EDWIN D.WORCESTER New York. WILLIAM L. SCOTT Erie, Pa. CHARLES M. REED Erie, Pa. RASSELAS BROWN Warren, Pa. JOHN NEWELL Cleveland, O. JEPTHA H. WADE Cleveland, O. One vacancy caused by death of Augustus Schell, March 27th, 1884. OIFIFiaiEIR/S- OFFICE. Chairman of the Board WILLIAM K. VANDERBILT New York. Pres't and Gen'l Manager JOHN NEWELL .. Cleveland. Vice Pres't, Treas. and Sec'y ..EDWIN D. WORCESTER New York. Assistant Treas DWIGHT W. PARDEE New York. Local Treas. and Ass't Sec'y... NICHOLAS BARTLETT. .Cleveland. Ass't Gen'l Manager. __ .ADDISON HILLS. ... Cleveland. Auditor CYRUS P. LELAND Cleveland. General Counsel ASHLEY POND Cleveland. Ass't General Counsel O. G. GETZEN-DANNER Cleveland. General Superintendent PHINEAS P. WRIGHT Cleveland. General Freight Agent GEORGE H . VAILLANT. _ _ Cleveland. Ass't Gen'l Freight Agent JOHN T. R. McKAY Cleveland. 11 CHARLES M. GRAY Chicago General Passenger Agent WILLIAM P.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter CCXXIV.1
    Chapter CCXXIV. 1 GERMANE LEGISLATION RETRENCHING EXPENDITURES IN APPROPRIATION BILLS. 1. The Holman rule. Sections 1481, 1482. 2. What constitutes retrenchment. Sections 1483–1502. 3. Reduction of number and salary of officers of the United States. Sections 1503– 1514. 4. Reduction of Compensation of persons paid out of Treasury. Section 1515–1517. 5. Reduction of amounts covered by bill. Sections 1518–1526. 6. Proposition must show on its face a retrenchment of expenditure. Sections 1527– 1546. 7. Proposition must be germane. Sections 1547–1549. 8. When accompanied by additional legislation. Sections 1550–1554. 9. General decisions. Sections 1555–1560. 1481. An exception to the rule forbidding legislation in a general appropriation bill admits germane legislation retrenching expenditures. Section 2 of Rule XXI provides: Nor shall any provisions in any such bill or amendment thereto changing existing law be in order, except such as being germane to the subject matter of the bill shall retrench expenditures by the reduc- tion of the number and salary of the officers of the United States, by the reduction of the compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill. The original rule adopted in 1835 2 forbidding legislative provisions in general appropriation bills gradually became construed through a long line of decisions to admit amendments increasing salaries but as excluding amendments providing for decreases. To remedy this defeat the House in 1876 3 on motion of Mr. William S. Holman, of Indiana, amended to the rule to include the following: nor shall any provision in any such bill or amendment thereto, changing existing law, be in order except such as, being germane to the subject-matter of the bill, shall retrench expenditures.
    [Show full text]
  • What Will Happen to Knapp House, the Original Wisconsin Governor's Mansion? - Isthmus
    11/19/2014 What will happen to Knapp house, the original Wisconsin governor's mansion? - Isthmus ISTHMUS What will happen to Knapp house, the original Wisconsin governor's mansion? State officials mum on plans for historic landmark by on Tuesday 11/18/2014 1:08 pm The future of the Wisconsin governor's mansion is in doubt. Not the current one, where 14 governors have lived. It's the earlier one, home to 18 governors from 1883 to 1950, that is a few blocks from the Capitol. The mansion may be sold by the Wisconsin Department of Administration, but officials have been vague about what they're considering. The potential sale has some fretting about the landmark's future. "It's such an important piece of the city's history, and the land around it is significant in that history," says Ald. Ledell Zellers, whose district includes the mansion. The mansion, 130 E. Gilman St., is on the National Register of Historic Places. The date of its completion is unknown, perhaps as early as 1854. At the time, the entire UW consisted of North Hall. Madison was two years from incorporating as a city. For many years the home was jokingly called "The White House" for its first owner, Julius White, later a Civil War general. Officially, it was the "Executive Residence," named by Belle Case La Follette, wife of governor and later U.S. Sen. Bob La Follette. She felt the term "mansion" distanced the public. The property totals 63,462 square feet. In 1950 the state transferred the property to the UW Board of Regents for $60,000, drawn from a UW trust fund created by Kemper Knapp.
    [Show full text]
  • Abington School District V. Schempp 1 Ableman V. Booth 1 Abortion 2
    TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1 Bill of Rights 66 Birth Control and Contraception 71 Abington School District v. Schempp 1 Hugo L. Black 73 Ableman v. Booth 1 Harry A. Blackmun 75 Abortion 2 John Blair, Jr. 77 Adamson v. California 8 Samuel Blatchford 78 Adarand Constructors v. Peña 8 Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell 79 Adkins v. Children’s Hospital 10 Bob Jones University v. United States 80 Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl 13 Boerne v. Flores 81 Advisory Opinions 15 Bolling v. Sharpe 81 Affirmative Action 15 Bond v. United States 82 Afroyim v. Rusk 21 Boumediene v. Bush 83 Age Discrimination 22 Bowers v. Hardwick 84 Samuel A. Alito, Jr. 24 Boyd v. United States 86 Allgeyer v. Louisiana 26 Boy Scouts of America v. Dale 86 Americans with Disabilities Act 27 Joseph P. Bradley 87 Antitrust Law 29 Bradwell v. Illinois 89 Appellate Jurisdiction 33 Louis D. Brandeis 90 Argersinger v. Hamlin 36 Brandenburg v. Ohio 92 Arizona v. United States 36 William J. Brennan, Jr. 92 Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing David J. Brewer 96 Development Corporation 37 Stephen G. Breyer 97 Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition 38 Briefs 99 Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority 38 Bronson v. Kinzie 101 Assembly and Association, Freedom of 39 Henry B. Brown 101 Arizona v. Gant 42 Brown v. Board of Education 102 Atkins v. Virginia 43 Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association 104 Automobile Searches 45 Brown v. Maryland 106 Brown v. Mississippi 106 Bad Tendency Test 46 Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company 107 Bail 47 Buchanan v.
    [Show full text]
  • LNY-28-Bios-1.Pdf
    LEADERSHIP NEW YORK 28 PROGRAM BIOGRAPHIES 2016-2017 Alex Stokes is a Director at HR&A Advisors, Inc., a real estate, economic development and public policy consulting firm headquartered in New York City. At HR&A, Alex has crafted strategies to guide the usage of public incentives and financing tools, the provision of affordable housing and open space, and the redevelopment of urban waterfronts and cultural districts around the country. Alex also serves as an in-house advisor for HR&A’s real estate practice and oversees the firm’s financial modeling training program. Since 2015, Alex has co-taught a seminar on redevelopment feasibility at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Design. Alex is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Paris- Dauphine. Through Coro LNY, Alex hopes to explore the strategies and partnerships required to support the equitable revitalization of New York City’s neighborhoods and improve the quality of life of all New Yorkers. Alice Shay is a city planner and urban designer with the Bloomberg Associates Urban Planning practice. She develops strategic planning and urban design projects that address waterfront infrastructure, public space, neighborhood development, and the implementation of land use tools. Prior to Bloomberg Associates, Alice worked with WXY Architecture and Urban Design, architecture and planning firm focused on the public realm. Alice consulted for the UN-HABITAT City Development Strategies program in Indonesia with the non-profit organization, Solo Kota Kita (SKK). Alice co-authored the Firm Foundation Social Design Field Guide, a guidebook on participatory design. Alice received a B.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States Washington, D.C
    Supreme Court of the United States Washington, D.C. Pointe-au-Pic, Canada, July 25, 1928. My dear George: I have your letter of July 3d, and am delighted to read it and to follow you and Mrs. Sutherland in your delightful journey through Italy. My wife’s sister, Miss Maria Herron, has done a great deal of traveling in Italy and elsewhere, and she says that you have marked out for yourselves one of the most delightful trips in the World. I have been through part of it myself, and therefore know enough to congratulate you. I sincerely hope that you find Cadenabbia just as good now as it was when you wrote the letter, and that you find that your rest is accomplishing the result that your doctor had in mind. Of course we are most anxious about the election of Hoover, and I am bound to say that I think the Republicans feel that the chances are strongly in favor of Hoover’s election, but I don’t know how wisely they judge. There are so many cross currents in the election that it is hard to calculate what their effect will be, but as the campaign opens, it is fairly clear that the farm question is entirely out of the picture. Even old Norris says that they can not have another party, and the consequence is that if Smith is going to win, he has got to do it with New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts, and by a retention of all the southern States.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Justices
    The Supreme Court Justices Supreme Court Justices *asterick denotes chief justice John Jay* (1789-95) Robert C. Grier (1846-70) John Rutledge* (1790-91; 1795) Benjamin R. Curtis (1851-57) William Cushing (1790-1810) John A. Campbell (1853-61) James Wilson (1789-98) Nathan Clifford (1858-81) John Blair, Jr. (1790-96) Noah Haynes Swayne (1862-81) James Iredell (1790-99) Samuel F. Miller (1862-90) Thomas Johnson (1792-93) David Davis (1862-77) William Paterson (1793-1806) Stephen J. Field (1863-97) Samuel Chase (1796-1811) Salmon P. Chase* (1864-73) Olliver Ellsworth* (1796-1800) William Strong (1870-80) ___________________ ___________________ Bushrod Washington (1799-1829) Joseph P. Bradley (1870-92) Alfred Moore (1800-1804) Ward Hunt (1873-82) John Marshall* (1801-35) Morrison R. Waite* (1874-88) William Johnson (1804-34) John M. Harlan (1877-1911) Henry B. Livingston (1807-23) William B. Woods (1881-87) Thomas Todd (1807-26) Stanley Matthews (1881-89) Gabriel Duvall (1811-35) Horace Gray (1882-1902) Joseph Story (1812-45) Samuel Blatchford (1882-93) Smith Thompson (1823-43) Lucius Q.C. Lamar (1883-93) Robert Trimble (1826-28) Melville W. Fuller* (1888-1910) ___________________ ___________________ John McLean (1830-61) David J. Brewer (1890-1910) Henry Baldwin (1830-44) Henry B. Brown (1891-1906) James Moore Wayne (1835-67) George Shiras, Jr. (1892-1903) Roger B. Taney* (1836-64) Howell E. Jackson (1893-95) Philip P. Barbour (1836-41) Edward D. White* (1894-1921) John Catron (1837-65) Rufus W. Peckham (1896-1909) John McKinley (1838-52) Joseph McKenna (1898-1925) Peter Vivian Daniel (1842-60) Oliver W.
    [Show full text]
  • 12/05/2005 Case Announcements #2, 2005-Ohio-6408.]
    CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS December 5, 2005 [Cite as 12/05/2005 Case Announcements #2, 2005-Ohio-6408.] MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS On December 2, 2005, the Supreme Court issued orders suspending 13,800 attorneys for noncompliance with Gov.Bar R. VI, which requires attorneys to file a Certificate of Registration and pay applicable fees on or before September 1, 2005. The text of the entry imposing the suspension is reproduced below. This is followed by a list of the attorneys who were suspended. The list includes, by county, each attorney’s Attorney Registration Number. Because an attorney suspended pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VI can be reinstated upon application, an attorney whose name appears below may have been reinstated prior to publication of this notice. Please contact the Attorney Registration Section at 614/387-9320 to determine the current status of an attorney whose name appears below. In re Attorney Registration Suspension : ORDER OF [Attorney Name] : SUSPENSION Respondent. : : [Registration Number] : Gov.Bar R. VI(1)(A) requires all attorneys admitted to the practice of law in Ohio to file a Certificate of Registration for the 2005/2007 attorney registration biennium on or before September 1, 2005. Section 6(A) establishes that an attorney who fails to file the Certificate of Registration on or before September 1, 2005, but pays within ninety days of the deadline, shall be assessed a late fee. Section 6(B) provides that an attorney who fails to file a Certificate of Registration and pay the fees either timely or within the late registration period shall be notified of noncompliance and that if the attorney fails to file evidence of compliance with Gov.Bar R.
    [Show full text]
  • Urn Nbn De Gbv 18-83986.Pdf (Pdfa)
    Ultrafast X-ray Spectroscopies of Transition Metal Complexes Relevant for Catalysis Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades an der Fakult¨at f¨ur Mathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften Fachbereich Physik der Universit¨at Hamburg vorgelegt von Alexander Britz aus Erlangen Hamburg 2016 Gutachter der Dissertation: Prof. Dr. Christian Bressler Prof. Dr. Wilfried Wurth Gutachter der Disputation: Prof. Dr. Christian Bressler Prof. Dr. Nils Huse Prof. Dr. Daniela Pfannkuche Prof. Dr. Angel Rubio Prof. Dr. Wilfried Wurth Datum der Disputation: 10. Januar 2017 Vorsitzende des Pr¨ufungsausschusses: Prof. Dr. Daniela Pfannkuche Vorsitzender des Promotionsausschusses: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Hansen Dekan der Fakult¨atf¨ur Mathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften: Prof. Dr. Heinrich Graener Abstract Transition metal (TM) complexes are ubiquitous in both technological and biological cat- alytic systems. For a detailed understanding of their reactivity, a knowledge of the fun- damental processes during chemical reactions is crucial. These primary processes involve correlated changes in spin state, molecular orbitals as well as the geometric structure of the reactant and occur on femtosecond (fs) time- and Angstr¨om(˚ A)˚ length scales. Using optical laser pump – X-ray spectroscopic probe techniques the aforementioned dynamics of solvated TM complexes can be tracked with 100-picosecond(ps)-resolution at synchrotrons and 100-fs-resolution at X-ray Free Electron Lasers (XFELs). Time-resolved (TR) hard X-ray absorption (XAS) and emission (XES) spectroscopy is exploited to site-selectively probe the optically induced changes in structure and molecular orbitals of TM complexes with high relevance for catalysis. A novel setup for TR XAS at PETRA III has been implemented, consisting of a repetition- rate-tunable synchronized MHz fiber amplifier laser and a data acquisition (DAQ) strategy which is capable of measuring multi-photon events with single photon resolution at MHz repetition rates.
    [Show full text]
  • SEC News Digest, 05-05-1977
    n- I sec news ---igest LIBR f Issue 77-87 (SEC Docket, Vol. 11, No. 20 - May l7) May 5, 1977 MAY 6 1977 RULES AND RELATED MATTERS u.s. SECURITIES AND REVISED PROPOSED RULEMAKING REGARDING EXCHANGE COMMISSION INVESTMENT CONCENTRATIONS IN SECURITY INVESTMENTS The SEC announced reV1S10ns of proposals to require disclosure of concentrations in security investments to make the proposed rules applicable only to commercial and industrial companies. (ReI. 33-5825) DECISIONS IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS NICHOLAS CUIOLA SANCTIONED The Commission has announced the issuance of an order imposing a remedial sanction upon Nicholas Chiola (Chiola). Chiola was employed at Mesirow & Co. (MesirowJ, Chicago, Illinois, a registered broker-dealer, from 1968 to May, 1975, as cashier and later as operations manager. The Commission's order was entered pursuant to an offer of settlement by which Chiola consented, without admitting or denying, to cer- tain findings and a sanction. The Commission found that from May, 1973 to May, 1975, Chiola wilfully aided and abetted violations of Section l7(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule l7a-3 thereunder in that Chiola caused false entries to be made to certain accounts of Mesirow's books and records to conceal diversions in excess of $100,000 from Mesirow's bank accounts to his own account. The Commission also found that on September 14, 1976, by an order of judgment and commitment entered in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Chiola was committed to the custody of the Attorney General for a period of two years following the entry of a plea of guilty to a one-count indict- ment alleging violations of Sections l7(a) and 32tal of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
    [Show full text]