OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# United States v. Louisiana (403 U.S. 950)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Order of the Court
United States Supreme Court
403 U.S. 950
United States v. Louisiana et al.
No. 9, Orig.
Joint motion of the United States and the State of Florida to initiate supplemental proceedings granted. Motions of the United States and the State of Florida to consolidate proceedings and to appoint Special Master granted.
IT IS ORDERED that the Honorable Albert B. Maris, Senior Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, be, and he is hereby, appointed Special Master to conduct supplemental proceedings which shall be docketed as case No. 52, Orig. The Special Master shall have authority to fix the time and conditions for filing additional pleadings and to direct subsequent proceedings, and authority to summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The Master is directed to submit such reports as he may deem appropriate.
The Master shall be allowed his actual expenses. Allowances to him, compensation paid to his technical, stenographic, and clerical assistants, cost of printing his reports, and all other proper expenses shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court may hereafter direct.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the position of Special Master becomes vacant during recess of the Court, THE CHIEF JUSTICE shall have authority to make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.
MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of these matters.

## 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
# United States v. Louisiana (Alabama and Mississippi Boundary Case)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
498 U.S. 9
United States v. Louisiana 9
No. ____

## 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
# United States v. Louisiana (403 U.S. 950)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
403 U.S. 950
United States v. Louisiana (403 U.S. 950)
Mr. Justice MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of the matters in 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
# United States v. Louisiana (Texas Boundary Case)

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
394 U.S. 1
United States v. Louisiana (Texas Boundary Case)
Argued: Nov. 18, 1968. --- Decided: March 3, 1969
Louis F. Claiborne, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Houghton Brownlee, Jr., for defendants.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN 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
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/26th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 37

Chap. XXXVII.—An Act making an appropriation for the temporary support of certain destitute Kickapoo Indians, and to defray the expense of removing and subsisting the Swan Creek and Black River Indians of Michigan.
Temporary support of destitute Kickapoo Indians. Payment of the Chickasaw clerks.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the sum of twenty-two thousand dollars be appropriated, out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the temporary support of certain destitute Kickapoo Indians, and that those clerks specially charged with the business of the Chickasaws be paid as heretofore out of the Chickasaw fund such sums as the President of the United States shall authorize.
Settlement of accounts of Clements, Bryan & Co.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the proper accounting officers of the Treasury Department be, and they are hereby, directed to adjust and settle the accounts of Clements, Bryan and Company, with the United States, arising under a contract, alleged to have been made on the twelfth June, eighteen hundred and thirty-eight, for subsisting the emigrating Cherokee Indians, upon principles of equity and justice; Provided, That in settling said accounts said accounting officers shall also take into consideration the contract of said Clements, Bryan and Company, with the United States of the twenty-seventh June, eighteen hundred and thirty-eight, and deduct any profits which they may have made under said last-mentioned contract, from whatever amount may be found due to them under said contract of June twelfth, eighteen hundred and thirty-eight; and such balance so found to be due, shall be paid out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Approved, March 3, 1841.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/26th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 38

Chap. XXXVIII.—An Act to amend the act entitled “An act to amend the act approved May thirteenth eighteen hundred, entitled ‘An act to amend an act entitled ‘An act to establish the judicial courts of the United States.’”
Act of July 20, 1840, ch. 47, not applicable to U. S. courts for the districts of Pennsylvania. Act of March 19, 1842, ch. 7.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That nothing contained in the act entitled “An act to amend the act approved May thirteenth eighteen hundred entitled ‘An act to amend an act entitled ‘An act to establish the judicial courts of the United States,’” passed the twentieth July, eighteen hundred and forty shall be deemed or taken to apply to the courts of the United States holden, or to be holden in and for the districts of Pennsylvania, but jurors in said districts shall be selected, returned and empanelled, as if the said act had not been passed.
Act limited to one year.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That this act shall continue in force one year and no longer.
Approved, March 3, 1841.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/26th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 40

Chap. XL.—An Act to abolish the port of delivery and the office of Surveyor of the Customs at Currituck Inlet in North Carolina.
The port and office abolished, and laws in conflict with this act repealed.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the port of delivery and the office of Surveyor of the Customs at Currituck Inlet in North Carolina be, and the same are hereby abolished, and that all laws in conflict with this act be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Approved, March 3, 1841.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/26th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 6

Chap. VI.—An Act making appropriations for the payment of revolutionary and other pensioners of the United States, for the year eighteen hundred and forty-one, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,Appropriations. That the following sums be, and the same are hereby, appropriated, in addition to former appropriations, to be paid out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the pensioners of the United States, for the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-one:
Revolutionary pensioners. 1818, ch. 19.For the revolutionary pensioners under the act of the eighteenth of March, one thousand eight hundred and eighteen, three hundred and fourteen thousand dollars;
Invalid pensions.For payment of invalid pensions, one hundred and seven thousand dollars;
Widows and orphans. 1836, ch. 362.For pensions to widows and orphans under the act of the fourth of July, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, four hundred and forty-eight thousand two hundred and forty-one dollars;
Five years’ pensions to widows. 1838, ch. 189.For five years’ pensions to widows under the act of the seventh of July one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight, one hundred and sixty-eight thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars;
Half-pay pensions.For half-pay pensions, payable through the offices of the Second and Third Auditors, five thousand dollars;
Arrearages.For arrearages, payable through the Second Auditor’s office, six hundred dollars;
For arrearages, payable through the Third Auditor’s office, one thousand dollars.
Removal, &c. of Seminoles.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That one hundred thousand dollars be, and the same is hereby, appropriated, to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of War, for the removal, subsistence, and benefit of such of the Seminole Indian chiefs and warriors as may surrender for emigration.
No arms to be delivered to them until, &c.Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That no rifles, or arms of any kind, shall be delivered to said Indians until they reach the western boundary of the State of Arkansas.
Approved, February 18, 1841.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/26th Congress/2nd Session/Resolution 1

Joint Resolution to present incorporated universities, colleges, &c., with copies of the catalogue of the Library of Congress.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,One copy to each, not exceeding 300. That one copy of the catalogue of the Library of Congress be presented to each of the incorporated universities, colleges, athenæums, and historical societies in the United States, not exceeding three hundred in number, and to the American Antiquarian Society.
Approved, January 14, 1841.
# United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/26th Congress/2nd Session/Chapter 5

Chap. V.—An Act to authorize the issuing of Treasury Notes.
An emission of not exceeding $5,000,000 at any one time outstanding, authorized. To be issued under the act of 12th Oct. 1837, chap. 2, as modified by the act of 31st March 1840, ch. 5. This law to expire in one year. Proviso.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States is hereby authorized to cause Treasury notes to be issued for such sum or sums as the exigencies of the Government may require; but not exceeding the sum of five millions of dollars of this emission, outstanding at any one time, to be reimbursed in the last quarters of the year, if the condition of the Treasury will permit it, and to be issued under the limitations and other provisions, contained in the act, entitled “An act to authorize the issuing of Treasury notes,” approved the twelfth day of October, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-seven, and as modified by an act, entitled “An act additional to the act on the subject of Treasury notes,” approved the thirty-first day ​of March, one thousand eight hundred and forty, except that this law shall expire in one year from and after its passage: Provided, That in case the Treasury notes outstanding and unredeemed, issued under former laws of Congress, added to the amount of such notes issued under this act, and actually expended or issued to meet payments due and payable before the fourth day of March next, shall, on the fourth day of March next, exceed the sum of five millions of dollars, then the President of the United States shall be, and he is hereby, authorized to issue, by virtue of the provisions of this act, such further amount of the said notes as will make the whole amount issued under this act, and applicable to payments falling due after the third day of March next, the full sum of five millions of dollars.
Approved, February 15, 1841.
# United States v. Perkins (116 U.S. 483)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
116 U.S. 483
United States v. Perkins
Argued: January 25, 1886. ---
Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury, for appellant.
J. N. Douglass, for appellee.
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
# United States v. Perot

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
98 U.S. 428
United States v. Perot
APPEAL from the District Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
The Solicitor-General for the United States.
Mr. Thomas J. Durant and Mr. C. W. Hornor, contra.
MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY 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
# United States v. Perkins (163 U.S. 625)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
163 U.S. 625
United States v. Perkins
This was a writ of error to an order of the general term of the supreme court affirming an order of the surrogate's court of Suffolk county, assessing an inheritance tax of $3,964.23 upon the personal property of William W. Merriam, bequeathed by him to the United States.
It appeared that Merriam, who was a resident of Suffolk county, died on January 30, 1889, leaving a last will and testament, by which he devised and bequeathed all his estate, both real and personal, to the United States government. Upon the petition of the executor, an appraiser was appointed; and upon his report the surrogate fixed the tax at the above amount. On appeal to the general term of the supreme court, the order of the surrogate's court was affirmed (26 N. Y. Supp. 191); and upon a further appeal to the court of appeals the order of the supreme court was affirmed, and the case remanded to that court for final judgment (36 N. E. 505), which was entered against the United States, March 31, 1894; whereupon the United States and the executor joined in suing out this writ of error. Defendant in error is the county treasurer of Suffolk county.
Sol. Gen. Conrad, for the United States.
Timothy M. Griffing, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice BROWN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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
# United States v. Perry

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
146 U.S. 71
United States v. Perry
Statement by Mr. Justice BROWN:
This case arose out of the importation of certain stained-glass windows containing effigies of saints and other representations of Biblical subjects. These windows were imported and entered November 24, 1890, as 'paintings' upon glass for the use of the Convent of the Sacred Heart, located at Philadelphia, and consisted of pieces of variously colored glass cut into irregular shapes, and fastened together by strips of lead, and intended to be used for decorative purposes in churches, and when so used are placed upon the interior of the window frame, and are backed by an outer window of ordinary white glass. The outer window is necessary, as such paintings require for their proper exhibition a transmitted light. These paintings had been executed by artists of superior merit, especially trained for the work, and represented Biblical subjects and characters, such as St. Agnes, St. Joseph teaching our Lord, St. Mark the Evangelist, and St. Peter, and other pictorial representations of like kind, designed for religious instruction and edification. They did not come to this country in a completed state, but in fragments, to be put together in the form of windows.
Upon these articles, the collector of the port levied and collected a duty of 45 per cent. imposed by paragraph 122 of the tariff act of October 1, 1890, (26 St. 573,) upon 'stained or painted window glass and stained or painted glass windows, * * * wholly or partly manufactured, and not specially provided for in this act.'
Against this classification defendant duly and seasonably protested, claiming the articles were exempt from duty as 'paintings * * * specially imported in good faith for the use of any society or institution * * * established for religious * * * purposes, * * * and not intended for sale,' under paragraph 677. A hearing was had before the board of general appraisers, who overruled the protest and affirmed the action of the collector. Respondents thereupon filed a petition in the circuit court for the southern district of New York, praying for a review of the decision of the general appraisers, as provided in section 15 of the act of June 10, 1890, (26 St. 138.) The circuit court reversed the decision of the board of appraisers, and held the paintings to be entitled to free entry. In re Perry, 47 Fed. Rep. 110. From this decision the United States appealed to this court.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury, for the United States.
Chas. Currie, W. Wickham Smith, and D. Ives Mackie, for appellee.
Mr. Justice BROWN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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
# United States v. Perkins

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "United States v. Perkins."
* 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.
* United States v. Perkins (116 U.S. 483)
* United States v. Perkins (163 U.S. 625)
# United States v. Perrin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
131 U.S. 55
United States v. Perrin
Atty. Gen. Garland and John T. Carey, Dist. Atty., for plaintiff.
Frank H. Hurd, Walter H. Smith, and Wm. M. Stewart, for defendant.
MILLER, 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
# United States v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
278 U.S. 269
United States v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
Argued: Nov. 19 and 20, 1928. --- Decided: Jan 2, 1929
[Argument of Counsel from pages 269-271 intentionally omitted]
The Attorney General, and Messrs. Daniel W. Knowlton and P. J. Farrell, both of Washington, D. C., for appellant Interstate Commerce Commission.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 271-273 intentionally omitted]
Mr. James B. McDonough, of Ft. Smith, Ark., for appellant Ft. Smith, S. & R. I. R. Co.
Messrs. H. H. Larimore, of St. Louis, Mo., Thomas B. Pryor, of Ft. Smith, Ark., and Edward J. White, of St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.
Mr. Justice BUTLER 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
# United States v. Mississippi Chemical Corp.

Supreme Court of the United States
405 U.S. 298
United States v. Mississippi Chemical Corp. et al.
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
No. 70-52 Argued: January 10, 1972 --- Decided: March 6, 1972
Respondent taxpayers are cooperative associations within the meaning of the Agricultural Marketing Act, and thus qualify for membership in one of the Banks for Cooperatives established by the Farm Credit Act of 1933, which provides that members may borrow money from their Banks. Respondents secured membership in the New Orleans Bank and elected to borrow. They were required by the Farm Credit Act of 1955 to make quarterly purchases of $100 par value Class C stock of the Bank equal to not less than 10% nor more than 25% of the amount of the quarterly interest paid to the Bank on their loans. During the relevant period the rate set by the Bank was 15%. Respondents claimed a $99 interest expense deduction on their tax returns for each $100 stock purchase required by the statute. The deductions were disallowed and respondents filed this suit for refunds. The Government contended the the stock is a capital asset as defined by 26 U.S.C. § 1221, and is nondeductible, while respondents asserted that the purchase price is part of "the amount [they] contracted to pay for the use of the borrowed money," and is deductible as interest. The District Court found for the respondents and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Held: It is clear from the legislative scheme that the Class C stock is a capital asset having a long-term value. Its cost is, therefore, not deductible as an interest expense. Pp. 302-312.
431 F. 2d 1320, reversed and remanded.
MARSHALL, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all Members joined except BLACKMUN, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Matthew J. Zinn argued the cause for the United States. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Walters, Thomas L. Stapleton, and Leonard J. Henzke, Jr.
John C. Satterfield argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was J. Dudley Buford.
Mac Asbill, Jr., Harold S. Cook, D. Jeff Lance, and William W. Beckett filed a brief for Agway, Inc., et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance.
# United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
364 U.S. 520
United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Company
Argued: Oct. 19, 1960. --- Decided: Jan 9, 1961
See 365 U.S. 855, 81 S.Ct. 798.
[Syllabus from pages 520-522 intentionally omitted]
Sol. Gen. Mr. J. Lee Rankin, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.521 Messrs. John T. Cahill and William C. Chanler, New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice WARREN 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
# United States v. Mitchell

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "United States v. Mitchell."
* 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.
* United States v. Mitchell (109 U.S. 146)
* United States v. Mitchell (205 U.S. 161)
* United States v. Mitchell (271 U.S. 9)
* United States v. Mitchell (322 U.S. 65)
* United States v. Mitchell (403 U.S. 190)
See also Mitchell v. United States.
# United States v. Missouri, K. & T. Railway Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
141 U.S. 358
United States v. Missouri, K. & T. Railway Company
[Syllabus from pages 358-360 intentionally omitted]
Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury and Wm. Lawrence, for the United states.
A. L. Williams, A. T. Britton, A. B. Browne, James Hagerman, and Simon Sterne, for appellees.
Mr. Justice HARLAN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, 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