OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Lankford v. Platte Iron Works Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Pitney
United States Supreme Court
235 U.S. 461
Lankford v. Platte Iron Works Company
Argued: October 14 and 15, 1914. --- Decided: January 5, 1915
Mr. Charles West, Attorney General of Oklahoma, and Messrs. W. A. Ledbetter and Joseph L. Hull for appellants.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 461-463 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Charles A. Loomis, Allen McReynolds, Howard Gray, and John W. Halliburton for appellee.
Mr. Justice McKenna delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lantern

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Lantern."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* The Lantern, by Alois Jirásek
* "The Lantern" by Frank Owen. in Weird Tales, 23 (2) (February 1934)

## Reference works

* "Lantern," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
* "Lantern," in Catholic Encyclopedia, (ed.) by Charles G. Herbermann and others, New York: The Encyclopaedia Press (1913)
* "Lantern," in Collier's New Encyclopedia, New York: P. F. Collier & Son Co. (1921)
# Kammerer v. Kroeger

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
299 U.S. 302
Kammerer v. Kroeger
Appeals from the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio.
Messrs. Gilbert Bettman, of Cincinnati, Ohio, W. S. McConnaughey, of Dayton, Ohio, and Raymond S. Powers, of Youngstown, Ohio, for appellants.
Messrs. Herbert D. Mills, Harold F. Demann, Harry P. Jeffrey, L. H. Mattern, Wm. G. Pickrel, Morris P. Cromer, and Geo. J. Donson, all of Dayton, Ohio, John W. Bricker, Atty. Gen., and Chas. H. Jones, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellees.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kan-Gi-Shun-Ca

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Ex parte Crow Dog, 109 U.S. 556 (1883), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a federal court did not have jurisdiction to try Crow Dog, a Native American (Indian) who killed another Indian on the reservation when the offense had been tried by the tribal council. In a conflict between two members of the same tribe, one killed the other while on reservation land. The tribe handled it according to Sioux tradition, and Crow Dog paid restitution. The United States government then tried Crow Dog for murder, and he was sentenced to hang. On his appeal to the Supreme Court, the court held that unless Congress authorized it, the courts had no jurisdiction to try the case. This case resulted in Congress enacting the Major Crimes Act in 1885, placing 15 major crimes under federal jurisdiction if committed by an Indian against another Indian on a reservation or tribal land. Warning: template has been deprecated.
United States Supreme Court
109 U.S. 556
Kan-Gi-Shun-Ca
109 U.S. 556
3 S.Ct. 396
27 L.Ed. 1030 Ex parte KAN-GI-SHUN-CA, (otherwise known as Crow Dog,) petitioner.1
December 17, 1883.
Walter H. Smith and A. J. Plowman, for petitioner.
Sol. Gen. Phillips, for respondent.
MATTHEWS, J.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kammerer v. Kroeger/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
299 U.S. 302
Kammerer v. Kroeger
These seven appeals present the same question. Under sections 687 to 687-23 Gen. Code Ohio, 115 Ohio Laws 3, section 1 et seq., effective February 27, 1933, the Superintendent of Building and Loan Associations of the State of Ohio took possession of the assets of the above-mentioned associations, respectively, for the purpose of liquidation. The superintendent sought authority to borrow money from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to pay off claims alleged to be prior to the shareholders' claims against such associations and to pledge the assets as security. Appellant shareholders on behalf of all the shareholders of the respective associations, through their counsel, successfully opposed the superintendent's applications. Thereupon appellants filed applications for the allowance of their counsel fees and expenses out of the assets of the associations. The common pleas court of Montgomery county, on motion of the superintendent, struck these applications from the files upon the ground that under the Ohio statutes the court did not have jurisdiction to consider or allow such fees. Motions for new trial and rehearing were overruled. The Court of Appeals of Montgomery County sustained the ruling of the court of common pleas. Appellants then appealed as of right to the Supreme Court of Ohio, and that court dismissed the appeals on the ground that 'no debatable constitutional question' was involved. In re American Loan & Savings Ass'n, 131 Ohio St. 330, 2 N.E.(2d) 823.
We find no basis for the contention that in denying appellants' claim to be paid their counsel fees and expenses out of the assets in the hands of the liquidator, upon the ground that the court was without jurisdiction to make such an allowance, any right of the appellants under the Federal Constitution has been infringed. The question is one of state practice and remedy. The motions to dismiss the appeals are granted and the appeals are dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Iowa Central R. Co. v. Iowa, 160 U.S. 389, 393, 16 S.Ct. 344, 40 L.Ed. 467; Standard Oil Co. v. Missouri, 224 U.S. 270, 280, 281, 32 S.Ct. 406, 56 L.Ed. 760, Ann.Cas.1913D, 936; McDonald v. Oregon Navigation Co., 233 U.S. 665, 669, 670, 34 S.Ct. 772, 58 L.Ed. 1145; Gasquet v. Lapeyre, 242 U.S. 367, 369, 370, 37 S.Ct. 165, 61 L.Ed. 367; Enterprise Irrigation District v. Canal Co., 243 U.S. 157, 166, 37 S.Ct. 318, 61 L.Ed. 644.
Dismissed.
Mr. Justice STONE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kanawha Michigan Railway Company v. Kerse

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
239 U.S. 576
Kanawha Michigan Railway Company v. Kerse
Argued: December 10, 1915. --- Decided: January 10, 1916
Messrs. Leroy Allebach and W. N. King for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 577 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. George A. Berry and R. F. Downing for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Pitney delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Law v. United States (266 U.S. 494)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
266 U.S. 494
Law v. United States
Argued: Dec. 8, 1924. --- Decided: Jan 5, 1925
Mr. De Witt T. Law, of Missoula, Mont., for plaintiff in error pro hac vice.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Donovan, for the United States.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Law v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Law v. United States."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* Law v. United States (Hempst. 338), an 1848 decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arkansas
* Law v. United States (266 U.S. 494), a 1925 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court
# Lawder v. Stone

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
187 U.S. 281
Lawder v. Stone
Argued: November 11, 1902. --- Decided: December 1, 1902
In the months of May, June, and July, 1897, the petitioners, copartners trading as S. M. Lawder & Sons, imported into the port of Baltimore from the British West Indies several cargoes of pineapples, invoiced as a specified number of dozens.
Upon the discharge of the cargo at Baltimore, after the pineapples had been taken out of the vessels and their number estimated by the inspectors, there remained in the holds a quantity of what was described as 'slush,' consisting of decomposed vegetable matter, mixed with bilge water and other d ebris of the cargo, some of it in a semi-liquid condition. This slush was brought up from the holds in baskets and included by the inspectors in their appraisement of the cargoes. The pineapples alleged to be contained in the slush were uncountable, and their number was roughly estimated by the inspectors by counting the pineapple tops and butts contained in a number of baskets of the slush, striking an average of those baskets, and then calculating the number contained in the whole quantity of slush according to that average. The material thus removed from the vessels was commercially valueless, and under the sanitary regulations of the city of Baltimore was taken down the river on a scow and dumped overboard. The number of pineapples so estimated by the inspectors to be contained in the slush was less than 10 per cent of the total invoice, and the collector treated the loss as a case of damage to the cargo within the meaning of § 23 of the customs administrative act of June 10, 1890, and assessed duty on the whole number of pineapples estimated by the inspectors to be contained in the cargoes, including this quantity of slush.
The board of general appraisers sustained a protest of the importers against the assessment of duties on the worthless and indistinguishable mass referred to, and this decision was affirmed, on appeal of the collector, by the circuit court of the United States for the district of Maryland. On a further appeal by the collector the circuit court of appeals for the fourth circuit reversed the decisions which had been made in favor of the importers and sustained the action of the collector. 41 C. C. A. 621, 101 Fed. 710. The case was then brought to this court by writ of certiorari.
Mr. Edward S. Hatch for petitioners.
Assistant Attorney General Hoyt and Messrs. James A. Finch, John C. Rose, and Solicitor General Richards for respondent.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Keeping the Peace

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Keeping the Peace."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* The United States Navy: Keeping the Peace (1966), a US Navy pamphlet
* Keeping the Peace (1924), a novel by Gouverner Morris
# Keeping the Peace (Morris)

By Gouverneur Morris
    Keeping the Peace
    The Wild Goose
    His Daughter
    When My Ship Comes In
    The Seven Darlings
    The Incandescent Lily
    The Penalty
    It, and Other Stories
    The Spread Eagle, and Other Stories
    The Footprint, and Other Stories
    If You Touch Them They Vanish
Charles Scribner's Sons
Keeping the Peace
By Gouverneur Morris
New York Charles Scribner's Sons 1924
Copyright, 1924, by Charles Scribner's Sons
To Edgar T. Gleeson
* Chapter 1
* Chapter 2
* Chapter 3
* Chapter 4
* Chapter 5
* Chapter 6
* Chapter 7
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1953, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Jam lucis orto sidere

"This hymn has frequently been ascribed to St. Ambrose, but it is not assigned to him by the Benedictine editors, or by Biraghi in his Inni sinceri e carmi di Sant' Ambrogio, 1862. It is certainly ancient, and may possibly be as old as the 5th cent." —"Jam lucis orto sidere," by James Mearns in A Dictionary of Hymnology, (ed.) by John Julian (1892)
English-language translations of Jam lucis orto sidere include:
* "The morning star hath risen high" by John Stanley Tute (1847).
* "Now doth the sun ascend the sky" by Edward Caswall (1849).
* "The star of morn to night succeeds" by John Henry Newman (1853).
# Jamaica

"I know an island which the sun"
* Edmund Clarence Stedman (1897), "Jamaica" in Poems, now first collected.
* Edmund Clarence Stedman (1908), "Jamaica" in The poems of Edmund Clarence Stedman.
# Jamaica, Land We Love

* related portals: National anthems.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
From the website of the government of Jamaica.
    Eternal Father bless our land,
    Guard us with Thy Mighty Hand,
    Keep us free from evil powers,
    Be our light through countless hours.
    To our Leaders, Great Defender,
    Grant true wisdom from above.
    Justice, Truth be ours forever,
    Jamaica, Land we love.
    Jamaica, Jamaica, Jamaica land we love.
    Teach us true respect for all,
    Stir response to duty’s call, strengthen us the weak to cherish,
    Give us vision lest we perish.
    Knowledge send us Heavenly Father,
    Grant true wisdom from above.
    Justice, Truth be ours forever,
    Jamaica, land we love.
    Jamaica, Jamaica, Jamaica land we love.
# Kovrak v. Ginsburg/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
358 U.S. 52
Kovrak v. Ginsburg
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kovrak v. Ginsburg

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
358 U.S. 52
Kovrak v. Ginsburg
Messrs. Filindo B. Masino and William B. Ball, for appellant.
Mr. Robert W. Lees, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kowan v. California

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
395 U.S. 335
Maurice H. KOWAN v. CALIFORNIA.
Gladys Towles Root and Kirkpatrick W. Dilling, for appellant.
Roger Arnebergh, Philip E. Gray and Michael T. Sauer, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kowan v. California/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
395 U.S. 335
Maurice H. KOWAN v. CALIFORNIA.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Kościuszko: A Biography

KOŚCIUSZKO
A BIOGRAPHY
KOŚCIUSZKO
A BIOGRAPHY
BY
MONICA M. GARDNER
AUTHOR OF "ADAM MICKIEWICZ"; "POLAND; A STUDY IN NATIONAL IDEALISM"; "THE ANONYMOUS POET OF POLAND," ETC.
LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LTD. RUSKIN HOUSE, 40 MUSEUM STREET W.C. 1 NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
First published in 1920
(All rights reserved)
TO
WIESŁAWA CICHOWICZÓWNA
I AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATE THIS
BOOK UPON THE NATIONAL
HERO OF HER
COUNTRY
CONTENTS
| - | | PAGE |
| | Preface | 17 |
| | Note on the Pronunciation of Polish Names | 21 |
| CHAPTER | CHAPTER | |
| I. | The Youth of Kościuszko | 23 |
| II. | The Fight for American Freedom | 37 |
| III. | The Years of Peace | 53 |
| IV. | The First Fight for Poland | 71 |
| V. | The Eve of the Rising | 87 |
| VI. | The Rising of Kościuszko—I. | 96 |
| VII. | The Rising of Kościuszko—II. | 129 |
| VIII. | The Russian Prison | 159 |
| IX. | Exile | 173 |
| | List of Books Consulted | 204 |
| | Index | 205 |
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1941, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 82 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Life among the Apaches

* related portals: Native American.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
American classic. 1868 report by a cavalry officer and journalist regarding relations among Native American tribes, U.S. settlers, and the cavalry during the early establishment of Native American reservations in the southwest United States.
LIFE
AMONG THE APACHES:
BY
JOHN C. CREMONY,
INTERPRETER TO THE U. S. BOUNDARY COMMISSION, UNDER THE HON. JOHN R.
BARTLETT, IN 1849, '50 AND '51, AND LATE MAJOR OF CALIFORNIA
VOLUNTEER CAVALRY, OPERATING IN ARIZONA, NEW
MEXICO, TEXAS AND WESTERN ARKANSAS.
SAN FRANCISCO: A. ROMAN & COMPANY, PUBLISHERS. NEW YORK: 27 HOWARD STEEET. 1868.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by
JOHN H. CARMANY & CO.,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the District of California.
Printed at the Commercial Herald Office, San Francisco, Cal.
TO THE PIONEER AND LIBERAL PUBLISHER,
Anton Roman
THE ZEALOUS AND ENTERPRISING FRIEND OF LITERATURE ON THE PACIFIC COAST, THIS UNPRETENDING VOLUME IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED AS A TRIBUTE OF THE AUTHOR'S ESTEEM.
CONTENTS OF THE VOLUME.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER V.
CHAPTER VI.
CHAPTER VII.
CHAPTER VIII.
CHAPTER IX.
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER XI.
CHAPTER XII.
CHAPTER XIII.
CHAPTER XIV.
CHAPTER XV.
CHAPTER XVI.
CHAPTER XVII.
CHAPTER XVIII.
CHAPTER XIX.
CHAPTER XX.
CHAPTER XXI.
CHAPTER XXII.
CHAPTER XXIII.
CHAPTER XXIV.
CHAPTER XXV.
CHAPTER XXVI.
CHAPTER XXVII.
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Jells v. Ohio

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
498 U.S. 1111
Jells v. Ohio
No. 90-6713
On petition for writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Feb. 19, 1991. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Justice MARSHALL, dissenting.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Jencks v. Quidnick Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
135 U.S. 457
Jencks v. Quidnick Company
B. F. Butler, O. D. Barrett, and A. B. Patton, for appellants.
Wm. L. Putnam, J. C. Ely, A. L. Brown, Augustus S. Miller, Wm. G. Roelker, and O. Frank Parkhurst, for appellees.
BREWER, J.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Learners as Leaders/Front matter

MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY LECTURES
No. XX
LEARNERS AS LEADERS
Published by the University of Manchester at THE UNIVERSITY PRESS (H. M. McKechnie, Secy.) Lime Grove, Oxford Road, Manchester
LONGMANS, GREEN & CO. London: 39 Paternoster Row New York: 443-449 Fourth Avenue and Thirtieth Street Chicago: Prairie Avenue and Twenty-fifth Street Bombay: 8 Hornby Road Calcutta: 6 Old Court House Street Madras: 167 Mount Road
# Lear, Inc. v. Adkins

Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653 (1969), is a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the doctrine of licensee estoppel and holding that public interest considerations require that licensees be free to challenge the validity of possibly spurious patents under which they are licensed. This entailed the overruling of Automatic Radio Mfg. Co. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 339 U.S. 827 (1950) and prior cases that it had reaffirmed. Warning: template has been deprecated.

## Concurring Opinion

    White

## Concurrence/Dissent

    Black
United States Supreme Court
395 U.S. 653
LEAR, INC., Petitioner, v. John S. ADKINS.
Argued: Nov. 20 and 21, 1968. --- Decided: June 16, 1969
[Syllabus from pages 653-654 intentionally omitted]
C. Russell Hale, Pasadena, Cal., for petitioner.
Lawrence G. Wallace, Washington, D.C., for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of Court.
Peter R. Cohen, Beverly Hills, Cal., for respondent.
Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Journal of Discourses/Volume 8

(Online document scan of Journal of Discourses, Volume 8)
Journal of Discourses Volume 8
DELIVERED BY PRESIDENT BRIGHAM YOUNG,
HIS TWO COUNSELLORS, THE TWELVE APOSTLES, AND OTHERS
REPORTED BY G. D. WATT AND J. V. LONG
AND HUMBLY DEDICATED TO THE LATTER-DAY SAINTS IN ALL THE WORLD.
VOL. VIII.
LIVERPOOL:
EDITED AND PUBLISHED BY GEORGE Q. CANNON, 42, ISLINGTON
LONDON:
LATTER-DAY SAINTS' BOOK DEPOT, 30, FLORENCE STREET, CROSS STREET, ISLINGTON.
1861
Preface
The deservedly ranks as one of the standard works of the Church, and every rightminded Saint will certainly welcome with joy every Number as it comes forth from the press as an additional reflector of "the light that shines from Zion's hill."
We rejoice, therefore, in being able to present to the Saints another completed Volume—the Eighth of the series; and, in doing so, we sincerely commend the varied and important instructions it contains to their earnest consideration.
THE PUBLISHER.
# Landon in The Literary Gazette 1830/The Portrait

​5
Literary Gazette, 8th May, 1830, Page 308
5. The Portrait.
Ah! let me look upon thy face,
 Fling back thy clustering hair;
It is a happiness to gaze
 On any thing so fair.
'Tis such spring-morning loveliness—
 The blushing and the bright—
Beneath whose sway, unconsciously,
 The heaviest heart grows light.
The crimson flushing up the rose
 When some fresh wind has past,
Parting the boughs—just such a hue
 Upon thy cheek is cast.
Thy golden curls, where sunshine dwells
 As in a summer home;
The brow whose snow is pure and white
 As that of ocean foam.
For grief has thrown no shadow there,
 And worldliness no stain;
It is as only flowers could grow
 In such a charmed domain.
I would thy fate were in my hands:
 I'd bid it but allow
Thy future to be like thy past,
 And keep thee just as now.
L. E. L.