OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Bosworth v. Carr, Ryder & Engler Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
179 U.S. 444
Bosworth v. Carr, Ryder & Engler Company
Argued: October 24, 25, 1899. --- Decided: December 17, 1900
The claim presented on this record was for the value of a quantity of manufactured doors, sash, blinds, and moldings, shipped from Dubuque, Iowa, on October 20, 1894, and consigned to the May & Thomas Hardware Company, Birmingham, Alabama, by way of East St. Louis. The car containing the merchandise in question was received by the Peoria Company from the connecting carrier, and, at about three o'clock on the afternoon of October 28, 1894, was deposited in its portion of the yard of the Terminal Association at East St. Louis set apart for the use of the Peoria Company, under the agreement referred to in the opinion just delivered in Huntting Elevator Co. v. Bosworth, number 12 of this term, ante, 183. On the night of the date last mentioned the car and contents were destroyed by the same fire which consumed or damaged the property of the Huntting Elevator Company. Both of the courts below decreed the liability of the Peoria Company, the court of appeals declaring that 'though in physical possession, under its agreement with the receiver, of the car in which the goods were being transported, the Terminal Association had not become responsible as a carrier therefor, because it had not been put in possession of a way bill or other form of information on which it could proceed with the carriage.' It necessarily results from the views expressed by us in the Huntting Elevator Company Case that the courts below did not err in the decrees rendered by them upon this claim.
The decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals, Affirming that of the Circuit Court, is accordingly 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
# Botanical Gazette/V07
## Articles

* North American Hepaticae by Lucien Marcus Underwood, (1882), pp. 18-21.
* Equisetum variegatum, Schleich. by Lucien Marcus Underwood, (1882), p. 76.
# Bragdon v. Abbott/Concurrence Ginsburg

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Stevens Ginsburg
* Concurrence/Dissents Rehnquist O'Connor
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection, as the description set out in the Court's opinion documents, ante, at 635–637, has been regarded as a disease limiting life itself. See Brief for American Medical Association as Amicus Curiae 20. The disease inevitably pervades life's choices: education, employment, family and financial undertakings. It affects the need for and, as this case shows, the ability to obtain health care because of the reaction of others to the impairment. No rational legislator, it seems to me apparent, would require nondiscrimination once symptoms become visible but permit discrimination when the disease, though present, is not yet visible. I am therefore satisfied that the statutory and regulatory definitions are well met. HIV infection is "a physical…impairment that substantially limits…major life activities," or is so perceived, 42 U.S.C. §§12102(2)(A), (C), including the afflicted individual's family relations, employment potential, and ability to care for herself, see 45 CFR §84.3(j)(2)(ii) (1997); 28 CFR §41.31(b)(2) (1997).
I further agree, in view of the "importance [of the issue] to health care workers," ante, at 654–655, that it is wise to remand, erring, if at all, on the side of caution. By taking this course, the Court ensures a fully informed determina- [p. 657] tion whether respondent Abbott's disease posed "a significant risk to the health or safety of [petitioner Bragdon] that [could not] be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures...." 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(3).
# Bragg v. Fitch

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
121 U.S. 478
Bragg v. Fitch
[ Wm. E. Simonds, for appellants.
J. S. Beach and John K. Beach, for appellees.
BRADLEY, 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
# Bragdon v. Abbott/Concurrence-dissent O'Connor

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Stevens Ginsburg
* Concurrence/Dissents Rehnquist O'Connor
Justice O'Connor, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.
I agree with The Chief Justice that respondent's claim of disability should be evaluated on an individualized basis and that she has not proved that her asymptomatic HIV status substantially limited one or more of her major life activities. In my view, the act of giving birth to a child, while a very important part of the lives of many women, is not generally the same as the representative major life activities of [p. 665] all persons—"caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working"—listed in regulations relevant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. See 45 CFR §84.3(j)(2)(ii) (1997); 28 CFR §41.31(b)(2) (1997). Based on that conclusion, there is no need to address whether other aspects of intimate or family relationships not raised in this case could constitute major life activities; nor is there reason to consider whether HIV status would impose a substantial limitation on one's ability to reproduce if reproduction were a major life activity.
I join in Part II of The Chief Justice's opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, which concludes that the Court of Appeals failed to properly determine whether respondent's condition posed a direct threat. Accordingly, I agree that a remand is necessary on that issue.
# Bragdon v. Abbott/Concurrence Stevens

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinions Stevens Ginsburg
* Concurrence/Dissents Rehnquist O'Connor
Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Breyer joins, concurring.
The Court's opinion demonstrates that respondent's HIV infection easily falls within the statute's definition of "disability." Moreover, the Court's discussion in Part III of the relevant evidence has persuaded me that the judgment of the Court of Appeals should be affirmed. I do not believe petitioner has sustained his burden of adducing evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact on the significance of the risk posed by treating respondent in his office. The Court of Appeals reached that conclusion after a careful and extensive study of the record; its analysis on this question was perfectly consistent with the legal reasoning in Justice Kennedy's opinion for the Court; and the latter opinion itself explains that petitioner relied on data that were inconclusive and speculative at best, see ante, at 653–654. Cf. General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997).
[p. 656] There are not, however, five Justices who agree that the judgment should be affirmed. Nor does it appear that there are five Justices who favor a remand for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed in either Justice Kennedy's opinion for the Court or the opinion of The Chief Justice. Because I am in agreement with the legal analysis in Justice Kennedy's opinion, in order to provide a judgment supported by a majority, I join that opinion even though I would prefer an outright affirmance. Cf. Screws v. United States, 325 U.S. 91, 134 (1945) (Rutledge, J., concurring in result).
# Bragg v. Weaver

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
251 U.S. 57
Bragg v. Weaver
Argued: Oct. 13, 1919. --- Decided: Dec 8, 1919
Messrs. George E. Allen, of Victoriz, Va., and John Garland Pollard, of Richmond, Va., for plaintiff in error.
Mr. J. D. Hank, Jr., of Richmond, Va., for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice VAN DEVANTER 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
# Biographia Literaria; or, Biographical Sketches of My Literary Life and Opinions/Volume 1

This work contains a number of Latin quotations. In most cases these are marked up with a translation using {{tooltip}}. The translations are derived from footnotes in Biographia Literaria (2014), by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, edited by Adam Roberts.
Biographia Literaria.
BY
S. T. COLERIDGE, Esq.
BIOGRAPHIA LITERARIA;
OR
Biographical Sketches
OF
MY LITERARY LIFE
AND
OPINIONS.
By S. T. COLERIDGE, Esq.
VOL. I.
LONDON:
REST FENNER, 23, PATERNOSTER ROW
1817.
S. Curtis, Printer, Camberwell.
BlOGRAPHIA LITERARIA:
OR,
Biographical Sketches
OF MY
LITERARY LIFE AND OPINIONS.
So wenig er auch bestimmt seyn mag andere zu belehren, so wuenscht er doch sich denen mitzutheilen, die er sich gleichgesinnt weis, (oder hofft,) deren Anzahl aber in der Breite der Welt zerstreut ist; er wünscht sein Verhältniss zu den ältesten Freunden wieder anzuknüpfen, mit neuen es fortzusetzen, und in der letzen generation sich wieder andere für seine übrige Lebenszeit zu gewinnen. Er wuenscht der Jugend die Umwege zu ersparen, auf denen er sich selbst verirrte.
Goethe
Translation. Little call as he may have to instruct others, he wishes nevertheless to open out his heart to such as he either knows or hopes to be of like mind with himself, but who are widely scattered in the world: he wishes to knit anew his connections with his oldest friends, to continue those recently formed, and to win other friends among the rising generation for the remaining course of his life. He wishes to spare the young those circuitous paths, on which he himself had lost his way.
* Chapter I
* Chapter II
* Chapter III
* Chapter IV
* Chapter V
* Chapter VI
* Chapter VII
* Chapter VIII
* Chapter IX
* Chapter X
* Chapter XI
* Chapter XII
* Chapter XIII
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
# Biographia Hibernica/Volume 2

* information about this edition.
* related portals: Biography.
Shortcut: BH
WORTHIES OF IRELAND.
Biographia Hibernica.
A
BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY
OF THE
WORTHIES OF IRELAND,
FROM THE
EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE PRESENT TIME.
WRITTEN AND COMPILED
By RICHARD RYAN.
"On Lough Neagh's banks as the fisherman strays, When the clear cold eve's declining, He sees the round towers of other days In the wave beneath him shining: Thus shall memory often, in dreams sublime, Catch a glimpse of the days that are over; Thus, sighing, look through the waves of time, For the long faded glories they cover."
Moore's Irish Melodies.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. II.
LONDON:
JOHN WARREN, OLD BOND STREET; M. N. MAHON; R. MILLIKEN; AND HODGES & M'ARTHUR, DUBLIN.
MDCCCXXI.
INDEX
TO THE
SECOND VOLUME.
———————————————— Printed by J. Brettell, Rupert Street, Haymarket, London.
# Biographia Literaria; or, Biographical Sketches of My Literary Life and Opinions

* Volume I.
* Volume II. (transcription in progress)
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
# Biographia Hibernica/William Bathe

* related authors: William Bathe.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
WILLIAM BATHE,
AN eminent Jesuit, was born in Dublin, in 1564. The Bathes were formerly of considerable eminence in the counties of Dublin and Meath, but by extravagance, misfortunes, and injudicious intermeddling in civil dissensions, they were so reduced that no branch of any note remains in the country. The parents of William Bathe were citizens of Dublin, and of the protestant religion: but not feeling a very anxious regard as to the religious principles of their son, they put him under the tuition of a zealous catholic schoolmaster, through whose early instruction his mind was imbued with such a predilection for that persuasion, as fitted him for the course of life he afterwards embraced. From Dublin he removed to Oxford, where he studied several years; but the historian of that university, Anthony Wood, was unable to discover at what college or hall he sojourned, or whether he took any university degree. Afterwards, being weary of the heresy professed in England (as he usually called it) he went abroad; and, in 1596, was initiated into the society of the Jesuits. After remaining some time in Flanders, he was sent to Padua, in Italy; and from thence to Spain, where he presided over the Irish seminary at Salamanca, ​"ad formationem spiritûs." He is said to have been actuated by a very strong zeal for the propagation of the catholic faith, and to have been much esteemed for the integrity of his life; but it is on record, that his natural temper was gloomy, and far from sociable. In 1614 he took a journey to Madrid to transact some business on account of his order, and died in that city, and was buried in the Jesuit's convent. He had a high character for learning; and one of his works proves him entitled to it—"Janua Linguarum, ceu Modus maxime accommodatus quo parebit aditus ad omnes Linguas intelligendas," Salamanca, 1611. It was published by the care of the Irish fathers of the Jesuits at Salamanca, and became a standard book for the instruction of youth. He also wrote, in Spanish, "A Preparation for the administering of the Sacrament with greater Facility, and Fruit of Repentance, than hath been already done," Milan, 1604. It was published by Joseph Creswell, under the name of Peter Maurique. He wrote in English and Latin, and published, but without his name, "A Methodical Institution concerning the chief Mysteries of the Christian Religion." He published another religious work, "A Method for the performing of general Confession."
In his youth, at Oxford, he was much delighted with the study of music; on which he wrote a treatise. It was entitled "A Brief Introduction to the True Art of Music, wherein are set down exact and easy Rules, with arguments and their solution, for such as seek to know the reason of the truth," London, 1584, 4to.
# Brick v. Brick

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
98 U.S. 514
Brick v. Brick
APPEAL from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. W. B. Webb for the appellant.
Mr. Joseph H. Bradley for the appellee.
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
# Brewster v. Wakefield

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
63 U.S. 118
Brewster v. Wakefield

## 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
# Brick

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Brick."
* 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.
* "Brick," in The American Cyclopædia (1879)
* "Brick," in Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., 1911)
# Bridal Song (Shakespeare)

Song from Two Noble Kinsmen

### Versions in Two Noble Kinsmen

See Two Noble Kinsmen for list of editions.

### Other versions

* "Roses, Their Sharp Spines Being Gone" in Shakespeare's Songs, (ed.) by Arthur Henry Bullen (1907).
* "Bridal Song" in the Oxford Book of English Verse 1250-1900 (ed.) by Arthur Quiller-Couch (1931).
* "Bridal Song" in the Oxford Book of English Verse 1250-1918 (ed.) by Arthur Quiller-Couch (1940).
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
# Beers v. Arkansas

Supreme Court of the United States
61 U.S. 527
JOSEPH D. BEERS, USE OF WILLIAM A. PLATENIUS, AS ADMINISTRATOR OF JAMES HOLFORD, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR v. THE STATE OF ARKANSAS
Writ of Error to the Supreme Court of Arkansas
Under the Constitution of the State of Arkansas, the Legislature passed a law allowing the State to be sued.
According to this law, a suit was brought upon some of the State bonds; and whilst the suit was going on, the Legislature passed another law, requiring the bonds to be filed in court, or the suit to be dismissed.
The suitor refusing to file his bonds, the suit was dismissed; and the case was carried to the Supreme Court of the State, where the judgment was affirmed.
The case, being brought to this court under the twenty-fifth section of the judiciary act must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
The permission to bring the suit was not a contract whose obligations were impaired by the passage of the subsequent law.
[p528] THESE three cases depended upon the same principle, and are therefore classed together. The report in the first-named case will apply to them all. It was a case which was brought up from the Supreme Court of the State of Arkansas, by a writ of error, issued under the twenty-fifth section of the judiciary act.
The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
It was argued by Mr. Pike for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Hempstead for the defendant.
1. ↑ [Together with two additional cases styled William A. Platenius, Administrator of James Holford, Deceased, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Arkansas.]
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Beers v. Haughton

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

## Dissenting Opinions

    Thompson
    Baldwin
United States Supreme Court
34 U.S. 329
Beers v. Haughton

## 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
# Beeson v. Johns

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
124 U.S. 56
Beeson v. Johns
Nathaniel Bacon, for plaintiffs in error.
Galusha Parsons, for defendants in error.
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
# British-American Tobacco Company v. Commissioner/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
This is a companion case to No. 10 (Helvering v. Stockholms Enskilda Bank, 293 U.S. 84, 55 S.Ct. 50, 79 L.Ed. 211), just decided. The facts, although differing in detail, are in substance the same. The same questions are involved. The court below reversed the Board of Tax Appeals for reasons substantially similar to those we have just expressed in No. 10 (C.C.A.) 69 F. (2d) 528. Upon the authority of No. 10, the judgment below is
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
# British-American Oil Producing Company v. Board of Equalization of State of Montana

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
299 U.S. 159
British-American Oil Producing Company v. Board of Equalization of State of Montana
Argued: Nov. 11, 1936. --- Decided: Dec 7, 1936
Messrs. H. C. Hall, of Great Falls, E. K. Cheadle, Jr., of Shelby, and E. J. McCabe, of Great Falls, for petitioner.
Messrs. Oscar A. Provost and Raymond T. Nagle, both of Helena, Mont., for respondents.
Mr. Justice VAN DEVANTER 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
# British Butterflies

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "British Butterflies."
* 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.
* British Butterflies, a book by William Stephen Coleman
* British Butterflies and their Transformations, a book by John Obadiah Westwood, illustrated by Henry Noel Humphreys
# British-American Tobacco Company v. Commissioner

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
293 U.S. 95
British-American Tobacco Company v. Commissioner
No. 24 Argued: Oct. 11, 1934. ---
Messrs. John H. Jackson, of New York City, and H. H. Shelton, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
The Attorney General and Mr. Angus D. MacLean, Asst. Sol. Gen., of Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND 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
# British Butterflies (Coleman)

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

### Contents

* Preface
* CHAPTER I. Introduction
* CHAPTER II. The Imago.
* CHAPTER III. Butterfly Life.
* CHAPTER IV. How to catch a Butterfly
* CHAPTER V. How to kill a Butterfly.
* CHAPTER VI. The British Butterflies Separately Described.
* Plates
# Bengal Dacoits and Tigers/Tiger Stories

TIGER STORIES
TIGER STORIES