OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Gardiner v. William S. Butler & Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
245 U.S. 603
Gardiner v. William S. Butler & Company
Argued: Dec. 18, 1917. --- Decided: Feb 4, 1918
This case comes here upon the report of a master asking the Court to decide whether two claims are provable. The first is upon a lease made by the petitioner to William S. Butler & Company. Receivers were appointed for the William S. Butler & Company corporation on November 7, 1912. At that time the winding up of the company was not contemplated by the bill or decree, but the object was to preserve the good will and pay the debts. On October 1, 1913, the petitioner entered, and on December 1, 1913, presented his proof of claims. The lease contained a clause similar to that in the lease of Wm. Filene's Sons Co., just considered (245 U.S. 597, 38 Sup. Ct. 211, 62 L. Ed. --), providing that in case of reentry the lessee should pay to the lessor the difference between the rental value and the rent and other payments required for the residue of the term. The claim was for rent up to the time of r entry and for damages for the later period. It was rejected by the courts below upon the same grounds as in the former case. 230 Fed. 1021, 144 C. C. A. 663. This decision, like the other, must be reversed.
The second claim is upon a lease by Russell to the same company of which Gardiner had purchased the reversion. In substance it is for damages similar to those held allowable under the former lease, but simply on the ground that the petitioner has lost the benefit of his bargain from the time of his reentry, the lease not containing any clause stipulating for such an allowance. Of course there are plausible analogies for the contention. But the law as to leases is not a matter of logic in vacuo; it is a matter of history that has not forgotten Lord Coke. Massachusetts has followed the English tradition and we believe that it is the general understanding in that State that in the absence of statute or express contract a lessor who has terminated a lease and evicted the tenant has no further claim against the lessee. Sutton v. Goodman, 194 Mass. 389, 395, 80 N. E. 608; Central Trust Co. v. Chicago Auditorium Association, 240 U.S. 581, 590, 36 Sup. Ct. 412, 60 L. Ed. 811, L. R. A. 1917B, 580. Upon this claim the decree below is affirmed.
Decree reversed.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS took no part in the decision of this case.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Garden of Eden

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Garden of Eden."
* 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.
* The Garden of Eden (1885), a book by John Doughty
* "The Garden of Eden", a scene in The Story of the Gadsbys (1888) by Rudyard Kipling
* "The Garden of Eden" in A Dictionary of the Book of Mormon (1891)

## See also

* Eden
# Gardner v. Broderick

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 273
Gardner v. Broderick, Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al.
Appeal from the Court of Appeals of New York
No. 635. Argued: April 30, 1968. --- Decided: June 10, 1968.
Appellant, a police officer, was subpoenaed by and appeared before a grand jury which was investigating alleged bribery and corruption of police officers, and was advised that the grand jury proposed to examine him concerning the performance of his official duties. He was advised of his privilege against self-incrimination, but was asked to sign a "waiver of immunity" after being told that he would be fired if he did not sign. He refused to do so, was given an administrative hearing, and was discharged solely for his refusal, pursuant to § 1123 of the New York City Charter. The New York Supreme Court dismissed his petition for reinstatement and the New York Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493, was not controlling, and distinguishing Spevack v. Klein, 385 U.S. 511 (both decided after appellant's discharge).
Held: If appellant, a policeman, had refused to answer questions directly relating to the performance of his official duties, without being required to waive his immunity with respect to the use of his answers or the fruits thereof in a criminal prosecution of himself, Garrity, supra, the privilege against self-incrimination would not have been a bar to his dismissal. However, his dismissal solely for his refusal to waive the immunity to which he is entitled if he is required to testify despite his constitutional privilege, and the New York City Charter provision pursuant to which he was dismissed, cannot stand. Pp. 276-279.
20 N.Y. 2d 227, 229 N.E. 2d 184, reversed.
Ronald Podolsky argued the cause and filed briefs for appellant.
J. Lee Rankin argued the cause for appellees. With him on the brief were Norman Redlich, Stanley Buchsbaum, and Robert T. Hartmann.
Michael J. Silverberg filed a brief for the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association of the City of New York, Inc., as amicus curiae, urging reversal.

## 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
# Geo Richardson Machinery Company v. Scott

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
276 U.S. 128
Geo Richardson Machinery Company v. Scott
Argued: Jan. 17, 1928. --- Decided: Feb 20, 1928
Messrs. D. H. Linebaugh and Paul Pinson, both of Muskogee, Okl., for petitioner.
Messrs. Jean H. Everest and Charles L. Moore, both of Oklahoma City, Okl., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS 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
# German Prisoners

* "German Prisoners", in Work-a-day Warriors (1917)
* "German Prisoners", in A treasury of war poetry, British and American poems of the world war, 1914-1919 (1917), edited by George Herbert Clarke
# German Savings Loan Society v. Dormitzer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
192 U.S. 125
German Savings Loan Society v. Dormitzer
Argued: December 16, 17, 1903. --- Decided: January 4, 1904
Messrs. William Scott Goodfellow, E. C. Hughes, and W. W. Hindman for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Robert A. Howard and Lucius G. Nash for defendants in error.
Messrs. William M. Murray and Frederick W. Dewart for Ernest B. Tull.
Mr. Justice Holmes 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
# German Savings Bank v. County of Franklin

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
128 U.S. 526
German Savings Bank v. County of Franklin
E. E. Cook, for appellant.
Thos. J. Layman, for appellee.
BLATCHFORD, 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
# German Instrument of Surrender (7 May 1945)

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Commons category, Wikidata item.
The German Instrument of Surrender was the legal instrument by which the High Command of the German Armed Forces surrendered simultaneously to the Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force and to the Soviet High Command at the end of World War II in Europe. Before the main body of the German military surrendered, there were partial surrenders of components of the German military.
This is the preliminary Instrument of Surrender, which was signed on 7 May, 1945, at Reims, France. The definitive signing took place in Berlin on 9 May 1945 (back-dated to 8 May 1945). The Reims signing took place in a red brick schoolhouse that served as the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF).
| ​ Only this text in English is authoritative Act of Military Surrender We the undersigned, acting by authority of the German High Command, hereby surrender unconditionally to the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and simultaneously to the Soviet High Command all forces on land, sea, and in the air who are at this date under German control. The German High Command will at once issue orders to all German military, naval and air authorities and to all forces under German control to cease active operations at 2301 hours Central European time on 8 May and to remain in the positions occupied at that time. No ship, vessel, or aircraft is to be scuttled, or any damage done to their hull, machinery or equipment. The German High Command will at once issue to the appropriate commanders, and ensure the carrying out of any further orders issued by the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and by the Soviet High Command. This act of military surrender is without prejudice to, and will be superseded by any general instrument of surrender imposed by, or on behalf of the United Nations and applicable to Germany and the German armed forces as a whole. ​In the event of the German High Command or any of the forces under their control failing to act in accordance with this Act of Surrender, the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and the Soviet High Command will take such punitive or other action as they deem appropriate. Signed at Rheims at 0241 France on the 7th day of May, 1945. On behalf of the German High Command. in the presence of On behalf of the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force.      On behalf of the Soviet High Command.      Major General, French Army (Witness) | Page 1 Page 2 |
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
# German National Bank v. Speckert

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
181 U.S. 405
German National Bank v. Speckert
Argued: March 12, 1901. --- Decided: May 13, 1901
Messrs. Alexander Pope Humphrey, John G. Carlisle, and Wm. M. Smith for appellants.
Messrs. John L. Dodd, J. C. Dodd, Aaron Kohn, David W. Baird, and T. W. Spindle for appellees.
Mr. Justice Gray 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
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 27d

Plate 27d. V. I. p. 218, Note.
A double row of similar hooks occurs on the first dorsal ray of the Barbel, (Barbus Vulgaris.) And on the anterior ray both of the dorsal and anal fins of the Carp, (Cyprinus Carpio.)
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 30

Plate 30. V. I. p. 234.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 3

Plate 3. V. I. p. 70.
Imaginary restoration of four species of Pachydermata, found in the Gypsum Quarries of Mont Martre. (Cuvier.)
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 31

Plate 31. V. I. p. 240.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 28

Plate 28. V. I. p. 230.
The longitudinal fibres are scarcely visible in the recent species, except where they are collected into fluted fasciculi, Pl. 28. fig. 4. BB.) in those parts which correspond with the marginal bands of the fossil species. (Original.)
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 32

Plate 32. V. I. p. 244.
A similar structure may be seen at the Collars of the transverse Plates of the N. Striatus. See Pl. 33.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 27c

Plate 27 c. Vol I. p. 214.
Plate 27d. V. I. p. 218, Note.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 27e

Plate 27e. V. I. p. 220.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 27f

Plate 27f . V. I. pp. 217 & 220.
Beautiful cluster of palatal teeth of Ptychodus polygyrus, from the Chalk. Insulated teeth of many species of this Genus abound throughout the Chalk formation. The mouth of these and all the other numerous extinct species of Sharks in the family of Cestracionts, was lined with a pavement of similar powerful teeth, forming a most efficient apparatus, for crushing the shells of Crustacea and Conchifera, which probably formed their principal food. The surfaces of the Enamel are often worn away, like that at Pl. 27 e . fig. 3. The strength and efficacy of these teeth, viewed as Instruments for crushing shells, is very remarkable. Beneath the Enamel, the body of each tooth is composed of a strong mass of bone. (Miss F. C. Burgon. Original.)
Plate 28. V. I. p. 230.
# Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology/Plate 29

Plate 29. V. I. pp. 232 and 234.
The wavy lines here seen between the Ink bag and the apex of the Pen, are the inferior terminations of the successive lamina? of growth; each larger and superior Plate overlapping the edges of the next subjacent and smaller plate. These edges are rendered more irregular by decomposition.
# Federal Reporter/Third series/Volume 140

* 140 F.3d 1 (1998) Allstate Insurance Company v. Occidental International Inc
* 140 F.3d 6 (1998) Russo v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation
* 140 F.3d 12 (1998) Viqueira v. First Bank
* 140 F.3d 20 (1998) Town of Sanford v. United States
* 140 F.3d 24 (1998) Baez-Cruz v. Municipality of Comerio
* 140 F.3d 31 (1998) Dykes v. Depuy Inc
* 140 F.3d 42 (1998) Flynn v. City of Boston
* 140 F.3d 52 (1998) Civil v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
* 140 F.3d 70 (1998) Lotus Development Corporation v. Borland International Inc Lotus Development Corporation
* 140 F.3d 76 (1998) United States Lp v. King
* 140 F.3d 86 (1998) United States v. Kaye
* 140 F.3d 91 (1998) Catanzaro v. Weiden a
* 140 F.3d 101 (1998) Ametex Fabrics Inc v. Just in Materials Inc
* 140 F.3d 111 (1998) Harman v. City of New York
* 140 F.3d 124 (1998) United States v. Jiang a
* 140 F.3d 129 (1998) Shipping Financial Services Corporation v. J Drakos Omi
* 140 F.3d 134 (1998) Buzzetti v. The City of New York W
* 140 F.3d 144 (1998) Reeves v. Johnson Controls World Services Inc
* 140 F.3d 157 (1998) Advani Enterprises Inc v. Underwriters at Lloyds
* 140 F.3d 163 (1998) United States v. Rodriguez
* 140 F.3d 169 (1998) Bryant Stratton Business Institute Inc v. National Labor Relations Board
* 140 F.3d 187 (1998) United States v. Hazut
* 140 F.3d 194 (1998) Hannex Corporation v. Gmi Inc
* 140 F.3d 207 (1998) Gadsden v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation
* 140 F.3d 210 (1998) Hili v. L Sciarrotta
* 140 F.3d 216 (1998) Brush Mfg Corp v. National Labor Relations Board
* 140 F.3d 222 (1998) No 97-1282
* 140 F.3d 229 (1998) United States v. Urban
* 140 F.3d 236 (1998) Wolfe v. City of Pittsburgh
* 140 F.3d 240 (1998) Norfolk Southern Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
* 140 F.3d 249 (1998) United States v. J Gantt
* 140 F.3d 259 (1998) Overnite Transportation Company v. National Labor Relations Board
* 140 F.3d 271 (1998) Coward v. Adt Security Systems
* 140 F.3d 277 (1998) Hinckley v. United States
* 140 F.3d 312 (1998) Rosario-Diaz v. Gonzalez M Rosario-Diaz
* 140 F.3d 317 (1998) Popa Roumeliotis v. Popa
* 140 F.3d 319 (1998) Bethlehem Steel Export Corporation v. Redondo Construction Corp
* 140 F.3d 321 (1998) Meltzer v. Comerica Inc
* 140 F.3d 324 (1998) Waters Corporation v. Millipore Corporation
* 140 F.3d 327 (1998) United States v. Velez Carrero
* 140 F.3d 331 (1998) The Korman Company v. Cumberland Farms Inc
* 140 F.3d 335 (1998) Kelley v. Airborne Freight Corporation
* 140 F.3d 357 (1998) Licciardi v. Tig Insurance Group
# Four Hundred and Forty-Three Cans of Frozen Egg Product v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
226 U.S. 172
Four Hundred and Forty-Three Cans of Frozen Egg Product v. United States
Argued: October 24 and 25, 1912. --- Decided: December 2, 1912
Mr. Ralph S. Rounds for appellant and plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 172-175 intentionally omitted]
Assistant Attorney General Adkins and Mr. Louis G. Bissell for appellee and defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 175-177 intentionally omitted]
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
# Four Japanese Tales

* related portals: Czech literature, Japan.
* sister projects: Commons category, Wikidata item.
The Library of Czechoslovakian Authors I
FOUR JAPANESE TALES
By
Jan Havlasa
Prague
Published by The Czechoslovakian Foreigners’ Office 1919
* Preface
* The Painter of Camellias
* The Garden of Fulfilled Desire
* The Darling of the Gods
* The Adventure of a Knight-errant
Edvard Leschinger Prague
My English version of the »Four Japanese Tales« coincides almost word for word with the Czech original, some parts of which I wrote in fact first in English
The faulty division of words and other errors were unavoidable for technical reasons.
The drawings are by LADISLAV ŠALOUN, the creator of the Hus monument in Prague.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1964, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 59 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Four Japanese Tales/Preface

PREFACE
Comparatively very little of Czech and Slovak literature is known to the British and American public, and our English speaking visitors have often complained of their inability to procure works of our fiction in translation. We have no doubt that the publishers of the United States of America and of Great Britain will in the near future see to satisfying the interest and curiosity of their public in this regard, and if we have decided to publish a few selections of the works of our authors in translation, we are led not so much by the wish to call attention to certain typically Czech authors as by the desire to show that unobserved by the world our writers could encompass the world and its highest ideals in their scope. We chose for the first volume of our little series a work by Jan Havlasa if for no other reason, because he is the only Czech fiction-writer expressing himself as readily in English as in his own language; and »Four Japanese Tales« are in fact not a translation but only the author’s own English version of his Czech work. A still more decisive reason was our wish to show that sympathies extended to our Siberian army by the Japanese could only strengthen the interest that already existed in our nation for the Japanese before they became aware of our existence. It is well to mention that Mr. Jan Havlasa spent a whole year in Japan not long before the outbreak of the war writing about his experiences both in Czech and English. For the following volumes we prepare a selection from the writings of Otakar Březina, the foremost Czech poet, a selection of old Czech myths from the pen of the most beloved author of Bohemia, Alois Jirásek, a book of verses, translated by the well-known fried of the Czech nation, Mr. P. Selver, an anthology of the work of Viktor Dyk, and others.
Karel Domin, Ph. Dr., President of the Czechoslovakian Foreigners Office.
# Four Little Blossoms at Brookside Farm

First book in the Four Little Blossoms series
FOUR LITTLE BLOSSOMS
AT
BROOKSIDE FARM
BY
MABEL C. HAWLEY AUTHOR OF "FOUR LITTLE BLOSSOMS AT OAK HILL SCHOOL," "FOUR LITTLE BLOSSOMS AND THEIR WINTER FUN," ETC.
Illustrated By
ROBERT GASTON HERBERT
NEW YORK GEORGE SULLY & COMPANY
CONTENTS
| CHAPTER | CHAPTER | PAGE |
| I | The Rescue of Philip | 7 |
| II | An Invitation | 18 |
| III | Aunt Polly | 26 |
| IV | The Willing Packers | 36 |
| V | Dot's Adventure | 45 |
| VI | Brookside at Last | 56 |
| VII | The Wreck of the Raft | 65 |
| VIII | Learning to Milk | 76 |
| IX | Lost in the Woods | 86 |
| X | The Blossoms Go Berrying | 94 |
| XI | The Home Laundry | 104 |
| XII | Up on the Mountain | 114 |
| XIII | Linda Is Unhappy | 123 |
| XIV | The Picnic | 132 |
| XV | The End of the Vacation | 141 |
ILLUSTRATIONS
| A Picnic in the Woods (See page 139) | Frontispiece |
| | FACING PAGE |
| In the Barn | 72 |
| In the Orchard | 100 |
| Baking Day on the Farm | 108 |
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Gibson v. Bruce

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
108 U.S. 561
Gibson v. Bruce
Thos. McDougall and Hoadly, Johnson & Colston, for appellant.
T. D. Lincoln, 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
# Gibson v. Chew

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
41 U.S. 315
Gibson v. Chew

## 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
# Gibson v. Chouteau

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Gibson v. Chouteau."
* 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.
* Gibson v. Chouteau (75 U.S. 314)
* Gibson v. Chouteau (80 U.S. 92)
See also Chouteau v. Gibson.