OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# United States v. Graham

United States Supreme Court
110 U.S. 219
United States v. Graham
Sol. Gen. Phillips and Thomas Simons, for appellant.
Robt. B. Lines, for appellee.
WAITE, C. 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. Grainger

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
346 U.S. 235
United States v. Grainger
Argued: May 4 and 5, 1953. --- Decided: June 15, 1953
Mr. John F. Davis, Washington, D.C., for appellant.
Mr. Jack J. Miller, Stockton, Cal., for appellee Grainger.
Mr. John V. Lewis, San Francisco, Cal., for appellees Clavere et al.
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
# United States v. Grand River Dam Authority

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
363 U.S. 229
UNITED STATES, Petitioner, v. GRAND RIVER DAM AUTHORITY.
Argued: May 17, 1960. --- Decided: June 13, 1960
Mr. J. Lee Rankin, Sol. Gen., Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Jess Larson, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Opinion of the Court by Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, announced by Mr. Justice HARLAN.

## 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. Gorham

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
165 U.S. 316
United States v. Gorham
The appellee herein filed his petition against the United States and the Comanche and Kiowa Indians in the court of claims on the 4th day of September, 1891, in which he claimed to recover damages for the destruction of his property on the 20th day of January, 1868, by the Comanche and Kiowa Indians, in amity with the United States, at Indian Creek, in Cooke county, Tex. The property destroyed consisted of horses, mares, and colts of the alleged value of $1,390.
The government filed an answer to such petition, in which it denied each and every allegation therein contained. The case was duly tried before the court, which found as facts that the claimant was at the time of the loss of his property, and ever since has been, a citizen of the United States, and that in the year 1868 he was the owner of the property described in his petition, and that it was of the total value of $1,390; that it was destroyed or taken from him by Indians belonging to the Indian tribes, at the time in amity with the United States, and the depredation was without just cause or provocation on the part of claimant, and that it did not appear at the time of the depredation that any Indian troubles existed; that no part of the property included in the computation had been returned or paid for. Upon these findings the court decided as conclusions of law that the plaintiff was entitled to recover from the United States the value of the property, $1,390, and that his petition as against the Comanches and Kiowas should be dismissed. Judgment was accordingly entered against the United States for the sum named, and for a dismissal against the Indians. A motion by the United States for a new trial was overruled, and thereafter an appeal was allowed to this court. Reported below in 29 Ct. Cl. 97.
The appellant assigns for errors of fact:
(1) That the court erred in finding that claimant's property was taken or destroyed by Indians belonging to Indian tribes at the time in amity with the United States.
(2) In finding that the depredation was committed without just cause or provocation on the part of the claimant or his agent.
(3) In finding that it does not appear that any Indian troubles existed at the time of the depredation.
Errors of law are assigned:
(1) That the court erred in its conclusion of law that the claimant should recover from the United States the sum of $1,390; and
(2) It erred in entering judgment against the United States.
Alex. Porter Morse, for the United States.
John Wharton Clark, for appellee.
Mr. Justice PECKHAM, 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. Van Leeuwen

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
397 U.S. 249
United States v. Van Leeuwen
Argued: Feb. 25, 1970. --- Decided: March 23, 1970
Solicitor Gen., Erwin N. Griswold, for petitioner.
Craig G. Davis for respondent.
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
# United States v. Ventresca

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

## Dissenting Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
380 U.S. 102
United States v. Ventresca
Argued: Jan. 18 and 19, 1965. --- Decided: March 1, 1965
Frank I. Goodman, Beverly Hills, Cal., for petitioner.
Matthew R. McCann, Worcester, Mass., for respondent.
Mr. Justice GOLDBERG 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. Vanzandt

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
24 U.S. 184
United States v. Vanzandt

## 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. Vanbiervliet

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
284 U.S. 590
United States v. Vanbiervliet
Statement of Facts.
The sole question is whether the Philippides Case, 283 U.S. 48, 51 S.C.t. 358, 75 L. Ed. 833 (decided by the Supreme Court March 23, 1931), and its result are controlling here. Having concluded to certify this to the Supreme Court, we state the important facts:
The alien entered the United States at Detroit on July 14, 1924, without any immigration visa, thus entering in violation of section 13 of the Immigration Act of 1924 (title 8, § 213 USCA). He was arrested for deportation January 3, 1930; and the warrant of deportation, based upon the finding 'that he was not, at the time of his entry into the United States, in possession of an unexpired immigration visa,' was issued February 17, 1930. Upon his petition for habeas corpus the District Court at Detroit discharged him from custody, because the period of limitation provided by section 19 of the Immigration Act of 1917 (title 8, § 155, USCA) had expired. From that order of discharge the government has appealed.
Question Certified.
Upon these facts, and for the proper decision of the cause, we desire the instructions of the Supreme Court upon this question:
'On January 3, 1930, did section 19 of the Immigration Act of 1917 (section 155, tit. 8, USCA) by its time limitations bar the deportation proceedings?'
A. C. DENISON, CHAS. H. MOORMAN, XEN HICKS, Circuit Judges.

## 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. Hellard

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
322 U.S. 363
United States v. Hellard
Argued: April 28, 1944. --- Decided: May 15, 1944
See 65 S.Ct. 27.
Mr. Marvin J. Sonosky, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. George H. Jennings, of Sapulpa, Okl., for respondent.
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
# United States v. Hendee

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
124 U.S. 309
United States v. Hendee
[Statement of Case from pages 309-312 intentionally omitted]
Atty. Gen. Garland, Asst. Atty. Gen. Howard, and F. P. Dewees, for appellant.
John Paul Jones and Robert B. Lines, for appellee.
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. Heirs of Waterman/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
39 U.S. 478
United States v. Heirs of Waterman
This case comes up by appeal from the Superior Court of East Florida, in which the claim of the appellees to a tract of land described in the record, was confirmed by a decree of that Court, proceeding pursuant to the acts of Congress for the final adjustment of claims to land in that territory.
It has been very candidly and properly admitted by the Attorney General, that every point involved in the case has been conclusively settled by this Court, in their former adjudications on similar cases; it therefore becomes unnecessary to state the nature of the claim now before us, further than that it is founded on a lawful grant, on conditions which have been fully performed by the grantee. This Court therefore orders, adjudges, and decrees, that the decree of the Court below, adjudging that the title of the appellees is valid under the treaty of 22d February, 1821, between the United States and Spain, the laws and customs of Spain, the law of nations, and of the United States, be, and the same is hereby, affirmed; and the cause is remanded to the Court below, with directions to further proceed therein, and to cause such further proceedings to be had as by law is directed.

## 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. Hemmer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
241 U.S. 379
United States v. Hemmer
Argued: May 5, 1916. --- Decided: June 5, 1916
Assistant Attorney General Knaebel for the United States.
Messrs. Lewis Benson and George Rice for Louis Hemmer et al.
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
# United States v. Hendler

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
303 U.S. 564
United States v. Hendler
Argued: March 9, 1938. --- Decided: March 28, 1938
Messrs. Homer S.C.ummings, Atty. Gen., and J. Louis Monarch, of Washington, D.C., for the United States.
Messrs. Wm. R. Semans and Randolph Barton, Jr., both of Baltimore, Md., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BLACK 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. Hovind (305 Fed. Appx. 615)

* related portals: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
* Court Documents
* Opinion of the Court
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 07-10090
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 06-00083-CR-3-MCR
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus ​ KENT E. HOVIND,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
No. 07-10502
Non-Argument Calendar
_______________________
D. C. Docket No. 06-00083-CR-3-MCR
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KENT E. HOVIND,
JO D. HOVIND,
Defendants-Appellants.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
_________________________
(December 30, 2008)
Before ANDERSON, MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

## See also

* United States of America v Kent Hovind and Jo Hovind (2006 indictment)
* Kent Hovind Property Seizure Ruling (2009 ruling)
# United States v. Howard

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
352 U.S. 212
United States v. Howard
Argued: Dec. 6, 1956. --- Decided: Jan 14, 1957
Mr. Leonard B. Sand, New York City, for appellant.
Mr. Clarence L. Thacker, Kissimmee, Fla., for appellee.
Mr. Justice REED 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. Howard P. Foley Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
329 U.S. 64
United States v. Howard P. Foley Company
Argued: Oct. 25, 1946. --- Decided: Nov 25, 1946
Mr.A. Devitt Vaneck, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. Alexander Heron, of Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BLACK 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
# Wanting is—what?

Layout 2
Wanting is—what?  Summer redundant,  Blueness abundant,  —Where is the blot? Beamy the world, yet a blank all the same —Framework which waits for a picture to frame:
What of the leafage, what of the flower? Roses embowering with nought they embower! Come then, complete incompletion, O comer, Pant through the blueness, perfect the summer!  Breathe but one breath
 Rose-beauty above,  And all that was death  Grows life, grows love,  Grows love!
# Wanted (Holland)

Published in Garnered Sheaves
WANTED.
God give us men! A time like this demands Strong minds, great hearts, true faith and ready hands;
Men whom the lust of office does not kill;
 Men whom the spoils of office can not buy; Men who possess opinions and a will;
 Men who have honor,—men who will not lie; Men who can stand before a demagogue  And damn his treacherous flatteries without winking!
Tall men, sun-crowned, who live above the fog  In public duty, and in private thinking;
For while the rabble, with their thumb-worn creeds, Their large professions and their little deeds,— Mingle in selfish strife, lo! Freedom weeps, Wrong rules the land and waiting Justice sleeps!
# Wanton Virgins Frightened/Billy and Molly's Parting

BILLY AND MOLLY'S PARTING.
LOVE, I am coming to take my leave, My dearest dear, do not sigh nor grieve; For I am going to the Spanish shore, To leave my charmer, to leave my charmer, To leave my charmer whom I do adore.
O Billy, Billy hearken unto me, How many ships there is loft at lea; You are safer sleeping in your true love's arms, Free from all dangers, free from all dangers, Free from all dangers and loud dreadful storms.
No storms nor dangers will I fear, I will go to sea in a privateer. And if it should please God to spare my life, When I return love, when I return love, When I return love, I will make you my wife.
There is one thing more that disturbs my mind, Some other girl I am afraid you will find, When you are sailing on the Spanish shore, You ne'er will think on, you ne'er will think on You ne'er will think on your charming Molly more.
O! if ten thousand fine girls I could see, None should enjoy my love but thee, O then says Molly since you are so true, I will ne'er wed, love, I will ne'er wed, love, I will ne'er wed, love, one alive but you.
Then this young couple they did part, Fear was the grief of true loves smart, So he took shipping and away he went, And left poor Molly, and left poor Molly, And left poor Molly, in tears to lament.
# Wanton Virgins Frightened/Different Humours

DIFFERENT HUMOURS.
T'OTHER day as I walk'd in the Park, the gentry being drest very fine, They all went away at the noon time of day, and for different taverns to dine.
The Nobles to the King's-head will go; the Gentry to the sign of the Crown; The Merchant you know to the Gold-fleece will go, and away to the Plow will the Clown,
The Drover at the Savage may be found, which ⟨humanity⟩ has mark'd with such scorn; The Huntsman you know to the Hound he will go, and the cuckold to the sign of the Horn.
The Clergy at the Mitre will dine, the Soldier at the sign of the Gun; The Butcher you know to the Black-bull will go, and the Friar to the sign of the Nun
The Players at the Shakespear may be found, the Sailor at the Anchor and Cann; The lawyer ye know to the Devil will go, and the Maid to the sign of the Man.
The Irishman fine on Potatoes will dine; the Welchman on hard toasted Cheese; The Scotchman you know to his Crowdie will go, and the Englishman to Pudding and Pease.
Thus it is every Man in his station, search East, West, North, and South, And be who has no Money in's pocket you know, may dine at the sign of the Mouth.
# Wanton Virgins Frightened

Layout 2
THE
Wanton VIRGINS Frightened.
To which are added,
THE REJECTED MAID.
DIFFERENT HUMOURS.
The DISCONSOLATE SAILOR.
BILLY and MOLLY'S PARTING.
THE BUSY CREW.
GLASGOW,
PRINTED BY J. & M. ROBERTSON,
SALTMARKET, 1802.
* Wanton Virgins Frightened
* The Rejected Maid
* Different Humours
* The Disconsolate Sailor
* Billy and Molly's Parting
* The Busy Crew
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
# Wanton Virgins Frightened/The Busy Crew

THE BUSY CREW.
THE busy Crew their sails unbending, the ship in harbour safe arriv'd, Jack Oakham all his perils ending, had made the port where Katty liv'd.
His rigging no one dare attack it, tight fore and aft, above, below, Long quarter'd shoes, check shirt, blue jacket, with trowsers like the driven snow.
His honest heart with pleasure glowing, he flew like light'ning to the side, Scarce had he been a boat's length rowing, before his Katty he espy'd.
A flowing-pennant gaily flutter'd, from her neat made hat of straw, Red was her cheek, when first she utter'd, it was her sailor that she saw.
And now the gazing crew surround her, while secure from all alarms, Swift as a ball from a nine pounder, they dart into each other's arms.
Printed by J. & M Robertson, Saltmarket. 1802.
# Wanton Virgins Frightened/The Rejected Maid

THE REJECTED MAID.
LONG have I spent my time in vain, By loving a young man did me disdain, By loving a young man did me disdain, Through woods and groves I took his part, False is the man that has won my heart, So deep is the wound and so great is the smart.
Why does the Heavens so decree? That women to men such slaves should be, etc. Their ways our hearts so easy won, When once betray'd they are undone. When, etc.
Beauty's a flower that's fine and gay, Young Virgin's hearts are soon betray'd, etc. But how can we stand the pow'rs of young men? They'll rove and range, do all we can, They have so many ways for to trapan.
They'll bring you presents fine and gay, Pretending in your arms to die away, etc. Dissimulation sure in every part, False is the man that has won my heart, So deep is the wound, and so great is the smart.
As soon as they have the conquest won, Straight to another girl they will run, etc. Boasting of all they have enjoy'd, And of your love they can't abide, Young Cupid has my heart betray'd.
Young Virgins all be wise in love, The jolly, fair and constant swain, The jolly, etc. And Cupid's dart you need not fear, Nor never seem to shed a tear, Take the man that's just and loves you dear.
# United States v. Allied Oil Corp.

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
341 U.S. 1
United States v. Allied Oil Corp.
Argued: March 6, 1951. --- Decided: April 9, 1951
Mr. Robert W. Ginnane, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Messrs. Thomas J. Downs, Theodore R. Sherwin, Chicago, Ill., for respondents.
Mr. Justice BLACK 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. Allison

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 303
United States v. Allison
APPEAL from the Court of Claims.
This was a suit brought by Allison, an employ e in the government printing-office, for additional compensation under the joint resolution of Congress approved Feb. 28, 1867 (14 Stat. 569).
The court below found, as a matter of fact, that the claimant was, on the day of the passage of the joint resolution, employed in that office, being paid by the day; and, as a matter of law, that the employees in the government printing-office, on the 28th of February, 1867, were employees in a bureau or division of the Department of the Interior, within the meaning of the joint resolution, and accordingly rendered judgment in favor of the claimant.
From this judgment the United States appealed to this court.
Mr. Solicitor-General Phillips for the appellant.
Mr. James A. Garfield and Mr. Joseph Daniels, contra.
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
# United States v. Allen (203 U.S. 476)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
203 U.S. 476
United States v. Allen
Argued: October 24, 25, 1906. --- Decided: December 10, 1906
Messrs. Oliver Mitchell, Edmund Wetmore, and Meyers, Cushman, & Rea for plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of counsel intentionally omitted]
Assistant Attorney General McReynolds, and John M. Coit for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel intentionally omitted]
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
# United States v. Allen (261 U.S. 317)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
261 U.S. 317
United States v. Allen (261 U.S. 317)
Argued: March 1, 1923. --- Decided: March 12, 1923
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Seymour, for the United States.
Mr. George A. King, of Washington, D. C., 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