OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 501 v. National Labor Relations Board

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
341 U.S. 694
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 501 v. National Labor Relations Board
Argued: Feb. 26, 27, 1951. --- Decided: June 4, 1951
Mr. Louis Sherman, Washington, D.C., for petitioners.
Mr. Mozart G. Ratner, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BURTON 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
# International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers v. Hardeman/Concurrence White

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion White
* Dissenting Opinion Douglas
United States Supreme Court
401 U.S. 233
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers v. Hardeman
Argued: Dec. 16, 1970. --- Decided: Feb 24, 1971
Mr. Justice WHITE, concurring.
The Court accurately states the holdings in San Diego Building Trades Council, etc. v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236, 79 S.Ct. 773, 3 L.Ed.2d 775 (1959), and like cases. But since the case before us 'implicates none of the principles,' ante, at 240, announced in those cases, neither is their continuing validity in their full sweep reaffirmed by today's opinion. On this basis, I join the Court's opinion.
I add an additional note. As the Court says, Hardeman's conviction on both charges against him was upheld. Expulsion was warranted on either count. The principle of Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359, 51 S.Ct. 532, 75 L.Ed. 1117 (1931), has no application in this situation. Turner v. United States, 396 U.S. 398, 420, 90 S.Ct. 642, 654, 24 L.Ed.2d 610 (1970); Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 115, 79 S.Ct. 1081, 1087, 3 L.Ed.2d 1115 (1959); Claassen v. United States, 142 U.S. 140, 146-147, 12 S.Ct. 169, 170-171, 35 L.Ed. 966 (1891); see also cases cited in Street v. New York, 394 U.S. 576, 613 n. 2, 89 S.Ct. 1354, 1376, 22 L.Ed.2d 572 (1969) (White, J., dissenting).
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, 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
# James v. Todd

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
358 U.S. 206
James v. Todd
Messrs. Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen. of Mississippi, W. E. McIntyre, Jr., Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Frank M. Dixon and Sol E. Brinsfield, for appellants.
Messrs. John Patterson, Atty. Gen. of Alabama, and Gordon Madison and George O. Miller, Jr., Asst. Attys. Gen., 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
# James v. Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
73 U.S. 752
James v. Railroad Company
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Wisconsin; James, Brewer, Greenleaf, Justice, and others, being the appellants, and the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroads appellee.
Messrs. Cary and Carlisle, for the appellants; Messrs. Cushing and Stark, contra.
Mr. Justice NELSON stated the case and 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
# James v. Strange

Supreme Court of the United States
407 U.S. 128
James, Judicial Administrator, et al. v. Strange
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Kansas
No. 71-11. Argued: March 22, 1972 --- Decided: June 12, 1972
Kansas recoupment statute enabling State to recover in subsequent civil proceedings legal defense fees for indigent defendants, invalidated by District Court as an infringement on the right to counsel, held to violate the Equal Protection Clause in that, by virtue of the statute, indigent defendants are deprived of the array of protective exemptions Kansas has erected for other civil judgment debtors. Pp. 129-142.
323 F. Supp. 1230, affirmed.
POWELL, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
Edward G. Collister, Jr., Assistant Attorney General of Kansas, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the brief were Vern Miller, Attorney General, and Matthew J. Dowd, Assistant Attorney General.
John E. Wilkinson argued the cause and filed a brief for appellee.
Marshall J. Hartman filed a brief for the National Legal Aid and Defender Association as amicus curiae.
# James v. Louisiana/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
382 U.S. 36
James v. Louisiana
The petitioner was convicted by a Louisiana jury of possession of narcotics and was sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years. The Supreme Court of Louisiana set aside the conviction on the ground that it was based upon evidence seized without a warrant during an illegal search. 246 La. 1033, 169 So.2d 89. Upon rehearing, however, that court affirmed the conviction by a divided vote. 246 La. 1053, 169 So.2d 97. We grant the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for certiorari and reverse the judgment.
Police officers arrested the petitioner near the intersection of Camp Street and Jackson Avenue in the City of New Orleans, after he had alighted from an automobile driven by another man. The officers then drove the petitioner to his home, more than two blocks away. They broke open the door and for several hours conducted an intensive search which finally yielded the narcotics equipment and single morphine tablet that constituted the basis of the petitioner's subsequent conviction.
The Supreme Court of Louisiana found that the officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner at the time they apprehended him, and the validity of his arrest is not here in issue. In the circumstances of this case, however, the subsequent search of the petitioner's home cannot be regarded as incident to his arrest on a street corner more than two blocks away. A search 'can be incident to an arrest only if it is substantially contemporaneous with the arrest and is confined to the immediate vicinity of the arrest.' Stoner v. State of California, 376 U.S. 483, 486, 84 S.Ct. 889, 891, 11 L.Ed.2d 856. See also Preston v. United States, 376 U.S. 364, 84 S.Ct. 881, 11 L.Ed.2d 777.
Under the doctrine of Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081, see also Ker v. State of California, 374 U.S. 23, 83 S.Ct. 1623, 10 L.Ed.2d 726, it was constitutional error to admit the fruits of this illegal search into evidence at the petitioner's trial. Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is granted, the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Louisiana for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
Petition for certiorari granted, judgment reversed, and case remanded for further proceedings.

## 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
# James v. Milwaukee

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
83 U.S. 159
James v. Milwaukee
ERROR to the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Mr. J. W. Cary, and O. H. Waldo (counsel in another but similar case), for the plaintiff in error; Mr. E. G. Ryan, contra.
Mr. Justice SWAYNE stated the case, and 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
# James v. Stone & Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
227 U.S. 410
James v. Stone & Company
Argued: January 23, 1913. --- Decided: February 24, 1913
Messrs. H. L. Stevens and Henry R. Miller for appellant.
No appearance for appellees.
Mr. Justice Day 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
# Ivanov v. United States/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 923
Ivanov v. United States
Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Yeagley, Kevin T. Maroney, and Lee B. Anderson, for the United States.
Motion to amend petition and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit granted, and case placed on the summary calendar; and this case is set for oral argument immediately following the reargument in No. 133. The grant of certiorari in this case is limited to the following questions:
On the assumption that there was electronic surveillance of petitioner or a codefendant which violated the Fourth Amendment,
(1) Should the records of such electronic surveillance be subjected to in camera inspection by the trial judge to determine the necessity of compelling the Government to make disclosure of such records to petitioner, and if so to what extent?
(2) If in camera inspection is to be authorized or ordered, by what standards (for example, relevance, and considerations of national security or injury to persons or reputations) should the trial judge determine whether the records are to be turned over to the defendant?
(3) What standards are to be applied in determining whether petitioner has standing to object to the use against him of information obtained from such illegal surveillance? More specifically, if illegal surveillance took place at the premises of a particular defendant,
(a) Does that defendant have standing to object to the use against him of any or all information obtained from the illegal surveillance, whether or not he was present on the premises or party to the overheard conversation?
(b) Does a codefendant have standing to object to the use against him of any or all information obtained from the illegal surveillance, whether or not he was present on the premises or party to the overheard conversation?
Mr. Justice MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and petition.

## 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
# Ives The Essays of Montaigne

Chapter introductions by Grace Norton
* Volume 1 – The Essays of Montaigne, Volume 1. (transcription project)
* Volume 2 – The Essays of Montaigne, Volume 2. (transcription project)
* Volume 3 – The Essays of Montaigne, Volume 3. (transcription project)
* Volume 4 – The Essays of Montaigne, Volume 4. (transcription project)
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Ives The Essays of Montaigne/Volume 1

Chapter Introductions by Grace Norton (1834 – 1926)
THE ESSAYS OF Montaigne TRANSLATED BY GEORGE B. IVES INTRODUCTIONS BY GRACE NORTON VOLUME I
CAMBRIDGE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1925
Copyright, 1925 BY HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS
TO GRACE NORTON
CONTENTS BOOK I
# Israel v. Gale

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
174 U.S. 391
Israel v. Gale
Frank Sullivan Smith and David Willcox, for plaintiff in error.
Martin Carey and W. S. Bissell, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice WHITE 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
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Bancroft

​ BANCROFT COUNTY was created by act of the Legislature in 1851 from a portion of old Fayette and embraced the twelve northern townships of what is now Kossuth County, extending to the Minnesota line, making an area of four hundred four square miles. The county was named ​in honor of George Bancroft, the historian. In January, 1853, it was attached to Boone County for election, revenue and judicial purposes. In 1855 by act of the General Assembly it was made a part of Kossuth and Bancroft County ceased to exist. The county was one vast level prairie through which the east fork of the Des Moines River flowed and its lands in early times were considered too wet for profitable cultivation but in later years the soil has been found to be exceedingly productive and has been converted into fine farms of increasing value. No county-seat was established during the brief period that Bancroft had an existence and no organization of a county government was perfected.
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Audubon

​ AUDUBON COUNTY was created by act of the Legislature of 1851 out of the then large county of Keokuk. It was named for John J. Audubon the naturalist and in 1853 was attached to Cass and divided into civil townships. It lies in the third tier east of the Missouri River and in the fourth north of the State of Missouri, contains twelve congressional townships and has a superficial area of four hundred forty-six square miles.
The first settlement within its limits was made in March, 1851, by Nathaniel Hamlin, John S. Jenkins and Arthur Decker, with their families, who took claims in a fine body of timber which became known as Hamlin’s Grove. In the fall of the same year Dr. S. M. Ballord and B. M. ​Hyatt made claims in another body of timber which was named Big Grove. William Powell the same year took a claim where Exira stands.
The county was organized in 1855, and the seat of justice located on the 20th of June on section twenty-two, township seventy-eight, range thirty-five west. Here a town was laid out and named Dayton. An election was held April 2d, 1855, at the house of John S. Jenkins at which Samuel Lewis was chosen county judge. In 1861 the county-seat was removed to a new town called Viola, laid out by D. M. Harris and David Edgerton; but the name was soon changed to Exira, in honor of a lady then living in the county. Dayton soon after disappeared from the map and its site became a farm. Oakfield was laid out in 1857 by E. D. Bradley who then opened the first store in the county. Oakfield took its name from a large oak grove which originally covered the town site on the east bank of the Nishnabotna River. The first newspaper in the county was established at Audubon City in December, 1860, and was named the Audubon Pioneer. Its proprietor was John C. Brown, who was killed in the war of the Rebellion at the Battle of Milliken’s Bend where he was serving as captain of Company I, Twenty-third Iowa Volunteers. East Nishnabotna is the largest stream running through the county from north to south, with numerous branches which afford a good supply of water. The surface of the county is rolling with deep ravines in places. The soil is very fertile producing abundant crops of grass, grain, fruit and vegetables. A branch of the Rock Island Railroad from Atlantic was the first to enter the county.
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties

* Adair
* Adams
* Allamakee
* Appanoose
* Audubon
* Bancroft
* Belknap
* Benton
* Black Hawk
* Boone
* Bremer
* Buchanan
* Buena Vista
* Buncombe
* Butler
* Calhoun
* Carroll
* Cass
* Cedar
* Cerro Gordo
* Cherokee
* Chickasaw
* Clarke
* Clay
* Clayton
* Clinton
* Cook
* Crawford
* Crocker
* Dallas
* Davis
* Decatur
* Delaware
* Des Moines
* Dickinson
* Dubuque
* Emmet
* Fayette
* Floyd
* Fox
* Franklin
* Fremont
* Greene
* Grimes
* Grundy
* Guthrie
* Hamilton
* Hancock
* Hardin
* Harrison
* Henry
* Howard
* Humboldt
* Ida
* Iowa
* Jackson
* Jasper
* Jefferson
* Johnson
* Jones
* Keokuk
* Kishkekosh
* Kossuth
* Lee
* Linn
* Louisa
* Lucas
* Lyon
* Madison
* Mahaska
* Marion
* Marshall
* Mills
* Mitchell
* Monona
* Monroe
* Montgomery
* Muscatine
* O'Brien
* Osceola
* Page
* Palo Alto
* Plymouth
* Pocahontas
* Polk
* Pottawattamie
* Poweshiek
* Ringgold
* Risley
* Sac
* Scott
* Shelby
* Sioux
* Slaughter
* Story
* Tama
* Taylor
* Union
* Van Buren
* Wahkaw
* Wapello
* Warren
* Washington
* Wayne
* Webster
* Winnebago
* Winneshiek
* Woodbury
* Worth
* Wright
* Yell
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Adair

​ ADAIR COUNTY was created by act of the Legislature of 1851 from territory embraced in the original county of Des Moines. It lies in the third tier north of Missouri and in the third tier east of the Missouri River. The county is twenty-four miles square and embraces an area of five hundred seventy-six square miles. The north tier of townships was from December 31st, 1837, to July 30, 1840, embraced in the old county of Keokuk as first established. The county was named for General John Adair a distinguished officer of the War of 1812 and afterwards the sixth Governor of Kentucky.
Thomas N. Johnson is the first white man known to have made a home within the limits of the county. He made a claim and built a log cabin in 1849 on section four in Washington township where, in 1850, he built a mill on a stream running through his farm. In 1850 William Alcorn made a claim on Middle river at a point known as “the upper crossing.” During the same year a Mr. Lyon took a claim and built a cabin near a large spring in a grove in what became Jefferson township. In 1851 J. J. Vawter purchased the claim and the grove took his name. Among the early settlers were William McDonald, who settled at the lower crossing of Middle River, Alfred Jones in Jackson township, Robert Wilson in Grand River, George M. Holiday in Jefferson, Joshua Chapman in Richland and Jacob Bruce in Grove.
In April, 1854, the first election was held in Alfred Jones’ cabin at which George M. Holiday was chosen county judge and John Gibson, clerk. The first court was held in the cabin of the judge on the 6th of May following. On the 24th of April, 1855, the county-seat was located at Summerset, a town laid out by G. M. Holiday, ​D. M. Valentine and Abram Ruth, and six miles south of the center of the county. In 1856 by act of the Legislature the name was changed to Fontanelle.
The first house in Summerset was a double log cabin built in June, 1855, by James C. Gibbs for a tavern and post-office. Mr. Gibbs was the first postmaster in the town and county. A store was opened in 1856 by Calvin Ballard.
At the time the county was organized the population was about one hundred fifty. The town of Greenfield, laid out in September, 1856, by Milton C. Munger is about six miles northeast of Fontanelle and in 1875 became the county-seat. Matthew Clark built the first house the same year which was used as a store by A. D. Littleton as well as a station of the Western Stage Company. The first school in the county was taught by Miss Huldah Lee in 1857 in the court-house at Fontanelle. The Congregationalists organized the first church in 1856 at the same place.
The Chicago and Rock Island Railroad was built through the extreme northern limits of the county in 1868 upon which the towns of Adair and Casey were laid out. The first newspaper was established by James C. Gibbs in 1863 and named the Adair County Register. After a long and bitter contest extending from 1865 to 1875 the county-seat was removed from Fontanelle to Greenfield.
# History of Iowa From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century/3/Counties/Belknap

​ BELKNAP COUNTY was created by act of the General Assembly in 1874, embracing townships seventy-four, seventy-five, seventy-six and seventy-seven in ranges thirty-eight, thirty-nine and forty in the eastern portion of Pottawattamie County. In compliance with the Constitution the proposition to establish this county was submitted to a vote of the electors residing in the county of Pottawattamie which it was proposed to divide and at this election was rejected so that Belknap County ceased to exist. The name was given in honor of General William W. Belknap, a distinguished Iowa officer in the Civil War and afterwards Secretary of War in the Cabinet of President U. S. Grant.
# Jones v. East Tennessee/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
157 U.S. 682
Jones v. East Tennessee
This was an action on the case to recover damages for injuries received through the alleged negligence of the defendant. Ten errors were assigned, two of which relate to the exclusion of evidence. As to one of these, it was properly admitted at the bar that the evidence in question was not excluded, and that so much of the record as showed the contrary was taken from the record of a former trial of the case. As to the other, no exception to the action of the court was preserved. The remaining errors assigned relate to the refusal to give certain instructions requested by plaintiff, and to parts of the charge. The record shows that plaintiff asked six instructions, of which the court gave two, declined to give one, and declined to give the other three except as covered by the general charge. The whole charge is contained in the bill of exceptions, which thus concludes: 'To which refusal and charge of the court andt he exclusion of evidence offered, and to the action of the court in refusing a new trial, plaintiff excepted, and tendered this bill of exceptions, which was signed and sealed by the court, and ordered to be made a part of the record in this cause.' This exception was insufficient. Rule 4 (3 Sup. Ct. v.); Rogers v. The Marshal, 1 Wall. 644; Harvey v. Tyler, 2 Wall. 328; Insurance Co. v. Sea, 21 Wall. 158; Beaver v. Taylor, 93 U.S. 46; Block v. Darling, 140 U.S. 238, 11 Sup. Ct. 832.
Judgment affirmed.

## 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
# Jones v. Florida/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
394 U.S. 720
Jones v. Florida
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, for further consideration in light of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476, and Roberts v. Russell, 392 U.S. 293, 88 S.Ct. 1921, 20 L.Ed.2d 1100.

## 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
# Jones v. Clifton

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
101 U.S. 225
Jones v. Clifton
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Benjamin H. Bristow and Mr. James A. Beattie for the appellant.
Mr. Martin Bijur, contra.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD 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