OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# McComb v. Commissioners of Knox County/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 1
McComb v. Commissioners of Knox County
The Commissioners of Knox County having sued McComb in the Court of Common Pleas of Richland County, he filed an answer to their petition, to which they demurred, alleging for cause that it did not contain facts sufficient to bar the action. This demurrer was overruled, and replies were thereupon filed. McComb then demurred to the replies, because the facts stated did not constitute a defence to the matter set up in the answer. This demurrer was sustained, and judgment given in favor of McComb.
The case was then taken by writ of error to the Supreme Court of the State, where the judgment of the Common Pleas was reversed for error in sustaining the demurrer to the replies, and overruling that to the answer; but, upon suggestion by McComb that he might ask leave to amend his answer, the cause was remanded 'for further proceedings according to law.' Upon the filing of the mandate in the Common Pleas, that court, in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, overruled the demurrer to the replies, and sustained that to the answer. McComb did not ask leave to amend his answer, but elected to rely upon his defence, as already stated. Thereupon the court gave judgment against him upon the case made by the petition.
This writ of error is prosecuted to reverse that judgment.
The Court of Common Pleas is not the highest court of the State; but the judgment we are called upon to re-examine is the judgment of that court alone. The judgment of the Supreme Court is one of reversal only. As such, it was not a final judgment. Parcels v. Johnson, 20 Wall. 653; Moore v. Robbins, 18 id. 588; St. Clair v. Lovingston, id. 628. The Common Pleas was not directed to enter a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court and carry it into execution, but to proceed with the case according to law. The Supreme Court, so far from putting an end to the litigation, purposely left it open. The law of the case upon the pleadings as they stood was settled; but ample power was left in the Common Pleas to permit the parties to make a new case by amendment. In fact, the cause was sent back for further proceedings because of the suggestion by McComb that he might want to present a new defence by amending his answer.
The final judgment is, therefore, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, and not of the Supreme Court. It may have been the necessary result of the decision by the Supreme Court of the questions presented for its determination; but it is none the less, on that account, the act of the Common Pleas. As such, it was, when rendered, open to review by the Supreme Court, and for that reason is not the final judgment 'of the highest court in the State in which a decision in the suit could be had.' Rev. Stat. sect. 709.
The writ is dismissed.

## 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
# McComb v. Frink

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
149 U.S. 629
McComb v. Frink
Suit by George A. Frink and Esther S. Snyder, administrator and administratrix or C. Brown Snyder, against Elizabeth B. McComb, executrix of Henry S. McComb, for an accounting. There was a decree for complainants, (39 Fed. Rep. 292,) from which both parties appeal. Affirmed.
Statement by Mr. Justice BREWER:
On June 30, 1868, the Southern Railroad Association, an unincorporated association, was organized by certain parties for the purpose of leasing and operating the Mississippi Central Railroad, of which Henry S. McComb had previously obtained a lease for himself and his associates. The capital of this association was $1,500,000, of which Henry S. McComb subscribed $415,000 personally, and also $60,000 as trustee; Josiah Bardwell, $100,000; the balance being taken by 10 associates. On January 14, 1869, this association became incorporated, under a special act of the legislature of Tennessee, and to this corporation the voluntary association, on January 22, 1869, transferred its property. On January 21, 1869, such action was taken by this incorporated company that the capital stock named in its charter, to wit, $2,000,000, was issued to the subscribers of the original unincorporated association in proportion to the amounts of their subscriptions. In this way the subscription in the name of Henry S. McComb, trustee, was enlarged from $60,000 to $80,000, and represented 800 shares of stock, for which 8 certificates of 100 shares each, and numbered from 157 to 164, inclusive, were formally issued by the incorporated company on October 6, 1870, to Henry S. McComb, trustee, and so remained on the books of the company at the time of his death, December 30, 1881. It is undisputed that the subscription was taken originally by McComb as trustee for Josiah Bardwell. In the fall of 1869 this correspondence took place between Bardwell and McComb:
'My Dear McComb: Will you please acknowledge that you hold in 'the Southern Ass'n,' as trustee for [the benefit] or rather for C. B. Snyder, that am't of stock wh. you held as for me, Mr. Snyder having two months since pd. me its costs and interest. Yours truly, J. Bardwell. Boston, Nov. 12, 1869.'

## 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
# McCollum v. Hamilton National Bank of Chattanooga

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
303 U.S. 245
McCollum v. Hamilton National Bank of Chattanooga
Argued: Jan. 31, 1938. --- Decided: Feb 28, 1938
Messrs. Joseph W. Thompson and Joseph B. Roberts, both of Chattanooga, Tenn., for petitioner.
Mr. C. W. K. Meacham, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for respondent.
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
# McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Company

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Rutledge
United States Supreme Court
336 U.S. 187
McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Company
Argued: Dec. 14, 15, 1948. --- Decided: Feb 14, 1949
Bessie Margolin, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Louis Kurz, of Jacksonville, Fla., for respondents.
[Argument of Counsel from page 188 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS 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
# McComb v. Commissioners of Knox County

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 1
McComb v. Commissioners of Knox County
ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas for the County of Richland, State of Ohio.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. W. H. Smith for the defendant in error. No counsel appeared for the plaintiff in error.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE 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
# McKnight v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
98 U.S. 179
McKnight v. United States

## 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
# McKoy v. North Carolina/Concurrence White

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions White Blackmun Kennedy
* Dissenting Opinion Scalia
Justice WHITE, concurring.
There is nothing in the Court's opinion, as I understand it, that would invalidate on federal constitutional grounds a jury instruction that does not require unanimity with respect to mitigating circumstances but requires a juror to consider a mitigating circumstance only if he or she is convinced of its existence by a preponderance of the evidence. Under such an instruction, any juror must weigh in the balance any mitigating circumstance that in his or her mind is established by a preponderance of the evidence, whether or not any other jurors are likewise convinced. Neither does the Court's opinion hold or infer that the Federal Constitution forbids a State to place on the defendant the burden of persuasion with respect to mitigating circumstances. On this basis, I concur in the Court's opinion.

## 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
# Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton's life

* Inside Front Cover
* Title Page
* Apology and Notes
* Preface
* Allegorical portrait of Isaac Newton
* Life of Newton
* Genealogy of Newton
* Early life
* University years
* Royal Society
* Later days
# Men-at-the-Bar/Boothman, Charles Thomas

​Boothman, Charles Thomas, a member of the Northern circuit, matric. London Univ. 1861, educated at Stonyhurst, a student of the Inner Temple 20 Nov., 1865 (then aged 22), called to the bar 6 June, 1868 (eldest son of Thomas Boothman, Esq., of Manchester, dec.); born , 1843.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Boreham, Walter Long

​Boreham, Walter Long, M.A., Christ's Coll., Camb., 1874, a student of the Inner Temple 30 May, 187 1 (then aged 22), called to the bar 6 June, 1878 (2nd son of William Wakeling Boreham, Esq., J.P., of the Mount, Haverhill, Essex); born , 1849.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Booth, Charles

​Booth, Charles, M A. (fellow). King's Coll., Camb., 1856, goes the Midland circuit, J.P. Yorks West Riding, a student of Lincoln's Inn 15 Feb., 1855 (then aged 26), called to the bar 30 April, 1858 (eldest son of late Lt.-Col. Henry Booth, 43rd light infantry); born , 1829; married 24 April, 1867, Elizabeth Staveley, elder dau. of John Staveley Shirt, Esq., of Wales, near Rotherham.
    Brushes, Sheffield.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Borland, Rev. Robert Spencer

​Borland, Rev. Robert Spencer, M.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1853, rector of Harford, Devon, 1871-7, a student of Lincoln's Inn 20 Jan., 1847 (then aged 20), called to the bar 6 June, 1855 (3rd son of James Borland, M.D., of Teddington, Middlesex); born 1827.
    South Teddington, Hampton Wick, Middlesex.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Borlase, William Copeland

​Borlase, William Copeland, M.P. East Cornwall since 1880, M.A., Trin. Coll., Oxon, 1873, J.P. Cornwall, deputy warden of stannaries of Cornwall and Devon, vice-president of Society of Antiquaries, president of Royal Institution of Cornwall 1867-8, educated at Winchester, a student of the Inner Temple 18 Nov., 1867 (then aged 19), called to the bar 21 June, 1882 (3rd son of Samuel Borlase, Esq., of Castle Harneck, Cornwall); born 5 April, 1848; married , 1870, Alice Lucy, dau. of Rev. Alfred Kent, vicar of Coln St. Aldwyns, co. Gloucester.
    Laregan, Penzance; 18, Clifford Street, W.; Reform Windham, Cobden, Fielding, and National Liberal Clubs.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Boome, John Henry

​Boome, John Henry, educated at King's Coll., London, a student of the Middle Temple 3 March, 1869, called to the bar 26 Jan., 1872 (eldest son of John Coles Boome, late of West End, Essendon, Herts, gent.); born 16 Feb., 1847; married 26 Aug., 1872, Elizabeth, 3rd dau. of late William Baker, Esq., of Oundle, Northants.
    Headingley, Palmerston Road, Southgate, N.; 26, Old Square, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Booth, John

​Booth, John, M.A. Worcester Coll., Oxon, a student of Lincoln's Inn 27 Jan., 1859 (then aged 25), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1862 (eldest son of James Booth, Esq., of Fingest Grove, Bucks); reported dead 1884.
    Swinefleet Park, Goole, Yorkshire.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Booth, Richard

​Booth, Richard, M.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1880, matric. London Univ. 1869, equity draftsman and conveyancer, a student of Lincoln's Inn 20 Jn., 1874 (then aged 22), called to the bar 26 Jan., 1877 (only son of Rev. Samuel Harris Booth, Baptist minister); born 5 Aug., 1851; married 23 May, 1878, Ada, eldest surviving dau. of Thomas Williams, of Birkenhead.}}
    4, Stone Buildings, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Borooah, Anundoram

​Borooah, Anundoram, joint magistrate and deputy collector Jessore, matric. London Univ. 1870, educated at Presidency Coll., Calcutta, twenty-third in honours, a student of the Middle Temple 23 Nov., 1870, called to the bar 6 June, 1872 (2nd son of Gurgoram Borooah, of Gowhatty, Assam, East Indies, gentleman); born , 1850.
    Jessore, India.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Borradaile, George Edwin

​Borradaile, George Edwin, It.-col., late capt. 63rd foot, justice of the peace Straits Settlements Nov., 1859, and for the presidency of Madras 1862, police magistrate and commissioner of court of requests Straits Settlements 1859-60, cantonment magistrate Madras presidency 1862, magistrate of police Madras town 1867-8, an advocate of the High Court of Judicature Madras 20 Oct, 1868, a student of the Middle Temple 14 Nov., 1864, called to the bar 26 Jan., 1867 (2nd son of George Borradaile, of Cheltenham, gentleman); born 3 Sept., 1835; married 3 March, 1868, Maria Martha, only child of Robert Postle, Esq., of Cheltenham.
    1, Edinburgh Terrace, Kensington Palace, W.
# Leib v. Bolton

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Leib versus Bolton.
A motion was made, the 10th of November, on the part of the defendant, to set aside the return of the jury of inquiry, on affidavit of irregular proceedings; and the Court granted a rule to shew cause &c.
And now two of the jurors attended and deposed, that Leib’s book, supported by his own oath, had been admitted as evidence of the delivery of a quantity of leather by Leib, to the order of Bolton, in part discharge of an agreement between them. But being asked, whether they founded their inquest in any degree upon that evidence, they said it was founded upon that, and concurrent testimony.
In support of the motion it was contended, that, though the admission of books in the manner above stated, had been customary; yet that the custom ought not to be carried farther than to prove work done, or wares delivered; that the purpose for which they had been introduced, on the present occasion, arose upon a collateral point, to establish a sett off in diminution of the damages, and that it was, therefore, irregular to admit them. With respect to the concurrent testimony mentioned by the jurors, it was said, that as neither the nature, or effect of it, appeared to the Court, it might have been even more improper than the allowance of the books as evidence; but that, in all events, the inquest ought to be set aside, as what did appear, shews it to have been raised so far upon an erroneous foundation.
But, by the Court: We will not set aside the verdicts of juries of inquiry; nor the reports of referrees, upon frivolous grounds. Nor will we examine into the effect of any particular piece of evidence upon the minds of the jury; for, unless, it appears, that there was no proper evidence before them, we must presume that they had sufficient grounds for their inquest.
The Rule discharged.
Sergeant for the plaintiff—Lewis and Levy for the defendant. See Cases Temp. Hard. 381.
# Lehon v. City of Atlanta

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
242 U.S. 53
Lehon v. City of Atlanta
Argued: November 14, 1916. --- Decided: December 4, 1916
Messrs. John D. Little, Arthur G. Powell, Marion Smith, and Max F. Goldstein for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Samuel D. Hewlett and Jams L. Mayson for defendant in error.
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
# Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association
## Concurring Opinions

    Marshall
    Scalia
    Kennedy
United States Supreme Court
500 U.S. 507
Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association
No. 89-1217 Argued: Nov. 5, 1990. --- Decided: May 30, 1991
Rehearing Denied June 24, 1991. See --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 2978.
Syllabus
Subsequent to Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209, 97 S.Ct. 1782, 52 L.Ed.2d 261, in which the Court upheld the constitutionality of the Michigan Public Employment Relations Act's agency-shop provision and outlined permissible union uses of the "service fee" authorized by the provision, respondent Ferris Faculty Association (FFA), which is an affiliate of the Michigan Education Association (MEA) and the National Education Association (NEA), and which serves as the exclusive bargaining representative of the faculty of Michigan's Ferris State College, a public institution, entered into an agency-shop arrangement with the college, whereby bargaining unit employees who do not belong to the FFA are required to pay it, the MEA, and the NEA a service fee equivalent to a union member's dues. Petitioners, members of the Ferris faculty who objected to particular uses by the unions of their service fees, filed suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986, claiming, inter alia, that such uses for purposes other than negotiating and administering the collective-bargaining agreement violated their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. As here relevant, the District Court held that certain of the union expenditures were constitutionally chargeable to petitioners. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that each of the activities in question was sufficiently related to the unions' duties as petitioners' exclusive collective-bargaining representative to justify compelling petitioners to assist in subsidizing it.
Held: The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded.
881 F.2d 1388 (CA6 1989), affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

## 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
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kennedy, William Rann

​Kennedy, William Rann, M.A., Pembroke Coll., Camb., 1871, B.A., King's Coll., Camb., 1868, member of the Bar Committee since Dec., 1883, private secretary to president of Poor Law Board (Mr. Goschen) 1870-1, goes the Northern circuit, a student of Lincoln's Inn 12 July, 1867 (then aged 21), called to the bar 26 Jan., 1871, admitted a barrister of the Middle Temple ad eundem 4 April, 1882 (eldest son of Rev. William James Kennedy, of Manchester, an inspector of schools); born , 1846; married 1 Sept., 1874, Cecilia Sarah, youngest dau. of George Richmond, R.A., D.C.L.
    Beechlyn, Mossley Hall, Liverpool; 24, Clanricarde Gardens, W.; 2, King's Bench Walk, Temple, E.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kent, Robert Thomas

​Kent, Robert Thomas, M.A. Wadham Coll., Oxon, a student of Lincoln's Inn 20 Nov., 1841 (then aged 25), called to the bar 21 Nov., 1848 (eldest son of Robert Thomas Kent, Esq., of Kingston, Surrey); born , 1816; mar. 7 Aug., 1850, Caroline Julia, eldest dau. of late Thomas Cave, Esq., of Poole, Dorset.
    West Holme, Knowle Green, Staines, Middlesex.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kent, William Charles Mark

​Kent, William Charles Mark, editor of the Sun 1845-70, author of Alethei, etc., a student of the Middle Temple 17 Nov., 1856, called to the bar 10 June, 1859 [only son of William Kent, of Exeter (and Ellen his wife, dau. of Judge Baggs, of Demerara), only son of late William Kent, post-capt. R.N.]; born 3 Nov., 1823; mar. 27 June, 1853, Ann, eldest dau. of Murdo Young, of the Middle Temple, bar.-at-law.
    1, Campden Grove, Kensington, W.; Athenæum Club.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kennelly, David Joseph

​Kennelly, David Joseph, B.A. (fellow) Bombay Univ., hon. corresponding member of Royal Geographical Society, fellow of Royal Asiatic Society, F.S.S., a student of the Inner Temple 21 Nov., 1868 (aged 37), called to the bar 6 June, 1871 (eldest son of David Kennelly, late of Glanmire, co. Cork); born , 1831.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kenny, Courtney Stanhope

​Kenny, Courtney Stanhope, LL.M. (fellow). Downing Coll., Camb., 1878, senior in law tripos 1874 and chancellor's legal medallist 1875, law lecturer Trin. Coll., Camb., examiner in law tripos 1881-2-3, admitted a solicitor in Hilary term 1869, Cliiford's Inn prize, the Broderip gold medal, and a special prize of Incorporated Law Society, author of The Law of England on the Effects of Marriage on Property, The History of the Law of Primogeniture and Endowed Charities, a student of Lincoln's Inn 21 Jan., 1878 (then aged 30), called to the bar 26 Jan., 1881 (eldest son of William Fenton Kenny, of Ripon, Yorks, J.P.); born 18 March, 1847; married 21 April, 1876, Emily Gertrude, 4th dau. of William Wood Wiseman, M.R.C.S., of Ossett, Yorks.
    Downing College, Cambridge.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kent, Clement Boulton Roylance

​Kent, Clement Boulton Roylance, B.A. Trin. Coll., Oxon, classical exhibition, 2nd class classical mods, and 2nd class Lit. Hum., a student of Gray's Inn 19 Nov., 1881, Lee prize essay 1884, called to the bar 26 Jan., 1885 (eldest son of Alfred Clement Kent, of New Brighton, Cheshire, solicitor); born 28 Feb., 1860.
    Montpellier Terrace, New Brighton, Cheshire.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kenrick, Edward

​Kenrick, Edward, undergrad. New Coll., Oxon, a student of the Inner Temple 23 Nov., 1870 (then aged 20), called to the bar 7 June, 1873 (eldest son of John Bridges Kenrick, of Broadmead, Surrey); born , 1850.
    Broadmead, Send, Surrey.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kenyon, Hon. Edward Frederick

​Kenyon, Hon. Edward Frederick, M.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1870, from Harrow, J.P. Flints, a member of the Northern circuit, a student of the Middle Temple 17 April, 1863, called to the bar 11 June, 1867 (3rd son of Lloyd, 3rd Lord Kenyon); born 27 Aug., 1842 (see Foster's Peerage).
    16, Hereford Square, S.W.; 7, New Square, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kenrick, William

​Kenrick, William, B.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1834-5, a student of the Middle Temple 26 Jan., 1832, called to the bar 13 Jan., 1837 (3rd son of Rev. Jarvis Kenrick, of Blechingley, Surrey); born , .
# Men-at-the-Bar/Kent, Philip

​Kent, Philip, B.A. Trin. Coll., Camb., a student of the Inner Temple 11 Oct., 1859 (then aged 19), called to the bar 30 April, 1866 (eldest son of John Clarke Kent, of Upton-on-Severn, co. Worc., merchant); born , 1840.
    Bromley.
# Men-at-the-Bar/McCullagh-Torrens, William Torrens

​McCullagh-Torrens, William Torrens, M.P. Finsbury since 1865, Dundalk 1848-52, Yarmouth 1857-9, assistant commissioner poor law inquiry Ireland 1835, private secretary to late Rt Hon. Henry Labouchere (chief secretary for Ireland) and a member of Anti-Corn Law League, assumed the additional surname of Torrens 1863, member of London School Board (Finsbury district) 1870, LL.B., Trin. Coll., Dublin, 1842, B.A. 1833, author of Industrial History of Free Nations, Lectures on the Study of History, called to the bar at King's Inns, Dublin, 1836, a student of Lincoln's Inn 31 Oct., 1832 (then aged 19), called to the bar 6 June, 1855 (eldest son of James McCullagh, Esq., of Dublin); born Oct., 1813; married 1st, , 1836, Margaret Henrietta, dau. of John Gray, Esq., of Claremorris, co. Mayo; she died , 1873; he married 2ndly, , 1878, Emily, widow of Thomas Russell, Esq., of Leamington, 3rd dau. of late William Harrison, Esq., also of Leamington.
    4, Essex Court, Temple, E.C.; Brooks' Club, S.W.
# Men-at-the-Bar/McDonnell, John Randall

​McDonnell, John Randall, B.A. London Univ. 1845, undergrad. Magdalen Coll., Camb., a student of the Inner Temple 12 Jan., 1847 (then aged 19), called to the bar 30 Jan., 1852 (only son of John MacDonnell, Esq., of London); born , 1828.