OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Hunsaker v. Toltec Ranch Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
195 U.S. 640
Hunsaker v. Toltec Ranch Company

## 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
# Hunt v. Blackburn (127 U.S. 774)

Cite as: Hunt v. Blackburn, 127 U.S. 774 (1888).
Supreme Court of the United States
127 U.S. 774
HUNT v. BLACKBURN
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Arkansas
No. 199. Argued: Apr. 2, 1888 --- Decided: Apr. 9, 1888 --- Motion to reinstate submitted Apr. 26, 1888 --- Ordered continued Apr. 30, 1888

## Linked case(s)

128 U.S. 464 131 U.S. 403
A cause under submission having been dismissed by the court of its own motion for want of jurisdictional amount, the appellant moves to reinstate and submits affidavits. The court orders the motion continued, with leave to each party to file further affidavits.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Mr. J. B. Haskell for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.
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
# Hunt v. Blackburn

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Hunt v. Blackburn."
* 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.
* Hunt v. Blackburn (127 U.S. 774)
* Hunt v. Blackburn (128 U.S. 464)
* Hunt v. Blackburn (131 U.S. 403)
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 31

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 31 [35a] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 32

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 32 [36a] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 33

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 33 [37a] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 34

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 34 [38a] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 35

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 35 [39a] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 32a

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 32a [46] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 33a

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 33a [29] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 34a

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 34a [30] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 35a

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 35a [31] ]
# Jerusalem. The Emanation of the Giant Albion/Plate 31a

Written and etched 1804-1820. Source: Blake: The Complete Poetry & Prose (David. V. Erdman) In the internet: www.blakearchive.org
[ PLATE 31a [45] ]
# Hurt v. Hollingsworth

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
100 U.S. 100
Hurt v. Hollingsworth
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Texas.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Philip Phillips and Mr. W. Hallett Phillips for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. James Lowndes, contra.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Hurst v. Western and Atlantic Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
93 U.S. 71
Hurst v. Western and Atlantic Railroad Company
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Tennessee.
Hurst, the plaintiff in error, a citizen of Tennessee, sued the Western and Atlantic Railroad Company, a corporation of Georgia, in the law court of Chattanooga, Tenn., at its October Term, 1866. The cause was tried at the February Term, 1868, of that court, and resulted in a judgment in favor of Hurst. The Supreme Court of the State, at its October Term, 1869, reversed this judgment, and sent the cause back for a new trial. At the June Term, 1870, of the law court, the July Term, 1871, and the March Term, 1872, trials were had, in which the juries disagreed. At the July Term, 1872, after trial, another judgment was rendered in favor of Hurst. This judgment, too, the Supreme Court reversed, at its September Term, 1872, and the cause was again remanded for trial. Nov. 12, 1873, Hurst applied to the law court for a removal of the cause to the Circuit Court of the United States for that district, under the act of March 2, 1867. 14 Stat. 558 Upon this application the cause was removed but the Circuit Court, when it came there, refused to take jurisdiction, and remanded it to the State court.
This action of the Circuit Court is assigned here for error.
Mr. Henry Cooper for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. John Baxter, 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
# Hurst v. Hollingsworth/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
94 U.S. 111
Hurst v. Hollingsworth
Hurst, the plaintiff below, being in doubt whether his case was one to be brought here by appeal or by writ of error, took the precaution of suing out a writ of error, and also of obtaining the allowance of an appeal. At the proper time he filed a transcript of the record, and the cause was docketed by the clerk as upon a writ of error; thereupon the defendant moved to docket and dismiss the appeal. Hurst now appears and asks leave to docket his appeal. The defendant does not object to this, but, treating it as an election for Hurst to proceed here upon the appeal, moves to dismiss the writ of error.
These motions are all denied. There was but one action in the court below, and there is but one record. When the transcript of that record was brought here by Hurst, his cause was docketed. It is not necessary to enter it twice, because, out of abundant caution and to guard against a possible chance of dismissal, he has brought it here in two ways. He has but one cause; and, when we come to examine it, we will determine whether it is properly here by appeal or by writ of error, and will proceed accordingly.
Motions denied.

## 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
# Hurst v. Hollingsworth

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
94 U.S. 111
Hurst v. Hollingsworth
ON motion.
Mr. W. P. Ballinger for Hurst.
Mr. James Lowndes, 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
# Hurst v. Western and Atlantic Railroad Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
93 U.S. 71
Hurst v. Western and Atlantic Railroad Company
The act of March 2, 1867, provided, in substance, that where a suit was pending in a State court, between a citizen of the State in which the suit was brought and a citizen of another State, and the matter in dispute exceeded the sum of $500, such citizen of another State, whether plaintiff or defendant, if he made and filed in such State court an affidavit, stating 'that he has reason to and does believe that, from prejudice or local influence, he will not be able to obtain justice in such State court,' might have the cause removed to the Circuit Court of the United States. Here the suit was brought in a court of the State of Tennessee, by a citizen of that State, against a citizen of the State of Georgia. Under the Statute, the party who was a citizen of Tennessee could not have the cause removed to the Circuit Court, because he was a citizen of the State in which the suit was brought, and not of 'another State;' but the citizen of Georgia could. In this case, the removal was made upon the application of the party who was a citizen of Tennessee, and, consequently, the Circuit Court properly refused to entertain jurisdiction.
Judgment affirmed.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Jo-Jo/10

Jo-Jo Number 10 was published in January, 1948.

## Gallery

* Page 1
* Page 2
* Page 3
* Page 4
* Page 5
* Page 6
* Page 7
* Page 8
* Page 9
* Page 10
* Page 11
* Page 12
* Page 13
* Page 14
* Page 15
* Page 16
* Page 17
* Page 18
* Page 19
* Page 20
* Page 21
* Page 22
* Page 23
* Page 24
* Page 25
* Page 26
* Page 27
* Page 28
* Page 29
* Page 30
* Page 31
* Page 32
* Page 33
* Page 34
* Page 35
* Page 36

## References

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) before 1964, and copyright was not renewed.
* For Class A renewal records (books only) published between 1923 and 1963, check the Stanford University Copyright Renewal Database.
* For other renewal records of publications between 1922–1950, see the University of Pennsylvania copyright records.
* For all records since 1978, search the U.S. Copyright Office records.
Works published in 1948 could have had their copyright renewed in 1975 or 1976, i.e. between January 1st of the 27th year after publication or registration and December 31st of the 28th year. As this work's copyright was not renewed, it entered the public domain on January 1st, 1977.
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.
It is imperative that contributors ascertain that there is no evidence of a copyright renewal before using this license. Failure to do so will result in the deletion of the work as a copyright violation.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Jo-Jo/11

Jo-Jo Number 11 was published in February, 1948.

## Gallery

* Page 1
* Page 2
* Page 3
* Page 4
* Page 5
* Page 6
* Page 7
* Page 8
* Page 9
* Page 10
* Page 11
* Page 12
* Page 13
* Page 14
* Page 15
* Page 16
* Page 17
* Page 18
* Page 19
* Page 20
* Page 21
* Page 22
* Page 23
* Page 24
* Page 25
* Page 26
* Page 27
* Page 28
* Page 29
* Page 30
* Page 31
* Page 32
* Page 33
* Page 34
* Page 35
* Page 36

## References

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) before 1964, and copyright was not renewed.
* For Class A renewal records (books only) published between 1923 and 1963, check the Stanford University Copyright Renewal Database.
* For other renewal records of publications between 1922–1950, see the University of Pennsylvania copyright records.
* For all records since 1978, search the U.S. Copyright Office records.
Works published in 1948 could have had their copyright renewed in 1975 or 1976, i.e. between January 1st of the 27th year after publication or registration and December 31st of the 28th year. As this work's copyright was not renewed, it entered the public domain on January 1st, 1977.
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.
It is imperative that contributors ascertain that there is no evidence of a copyright renewal before using this license. Failure to do so will result in the deletion of the work as a copyright violation.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Joan's Enemies

* information about this edition.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
A torn strip of paper held the clue to vast wealth; and Joan and her lover knew many trials before it was found: an alluring mystery-story by the author of “Wee Macgreegor.”
Joan's Enemies $^{by}$ J. J. Bell
A Complete Novel
* page
* 1. In a Girl's Keeping 1100
* 2. A Pair of Scoundrels 1102
* 3. Joan's Inheritance 1105
* 4. The Maddening Document 1107
* 5. Mr. Lismore Sows a Seed 1109
* 6. Stormont Gets to Work 1112
* 7. Lottie Steals the Letter 1116
* 8. Miss Gosling Takes a Hand 1120
* 9. Joan Receives a Surprise 1123
* 10. The Silver Seal 1124
* 11. The Middle Step 1129
* 12. Lottie Brings News 1132
* 13. The Laboratory 1134
* 14. Miss Gosling Again Intervenes 1135
* 15. At Elm House 1138
* 16. Sheer Mischance 1141
* 17. At the Pennsylvania Station 1143
* 18. Stormont Forces the Game 1145
* 19. Late Calls 1149
* 20. The Treasure at Last 1150
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 1934, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 89 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
# Jo-Jo/7b

Jo-Jo Number 7b was published in September, 1947.

## Gallery

* Page 1
* Page 2
* Page 3
* Page 4
* Page 5
* Page 6
* Page 7
* Page 8
* Page 9
* Page 10
* Page 11
* Page 12
* Page 13
* Page 14
* Page 15
* Page 16
* Page 17
* Page 18
* Page 19
* Page 20
* Page 21
* Page 22
* Page 23
* Page 24
* Page 25
* Page 26
* Page 27
* Page 28
* Page 29
* Page 30
* Page 31
* Page 32
* Page 33
* Page 34
* Page 35
* Page 36

## References

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) before 1964, and copyright was not renewed.
* For Class A renewal records (books only) published between 1923 and 1963, check the Stanford University Copyright Renewal Database.
* For other renewal records of publications between 1922–1950, see the University of Pennsylvania copyright records.
* For all records since 1978, search the U.S. Copyright Office records.
Works published in 1947 could have had their copyright renewed in 1974 or 1975, i.e. between January 1st of the 27th year after publication or registration and December 31st of the 28th year. As this work's copyright was not renewed, it entered the public domain on January 1st, 1976.
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.
It is imperative that contributors ascertain that there is no evidence of a copyright renewal before using this license. Failure to do so will result in the deletion of the work as a copyright violation.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Independence Act of Ukraine

The Act Declaring the Independence of Ukraine was proclaimed by the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic on August 24, 1991.

## Parliamentary Decree

Decree of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic On the declaration of independence of Ukraine (Vidomosti Verkhovnoyi Rady, 1991, N 38, art.502)
The Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic decrees:
Ukraine shall be proclaimed independent democratic state on August 24, 1991.
Since the moment of the proclamation, on the territory of Ukraine, only its Constitution (888-09), laws, decrees of the Cabinet of Ministers, and other legislative acts of the republic shall be valid.
The republican referendum to confirm the act declaring independence shall be held on December 1, 1991.
Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukrainian SSR, L. Kravchuk
The City of Kyiv, August 24, 1991 N 1427-XII

## Independence Act

Act Declaring the Independence of Ukraine
Given the grave danger that had threatened Ukraine in connection with the coup d'etat in the USSR on August 19, 1991,
- continuing the millennial tradition of state creation in Ukraine,
- based on the right to self-determination provided by the Statute of the UN and other international legal documents,
- fulfilling the Declaration on the state sovereignity of Ukraine,
the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic solemnly proclaims the independence of Ukraine and the creation of the independent Ukrainian state - Ukraine.
The territory of Ukraine shall be indivisible and inviolable.
From now on, on the territory of Ukraine only the Constitution and laws of Ukraine shall have legal force.
This act shall be enacted on the moment of its adoption.
The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine August 24, 1991
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
# Independence (Thoreau)

"My life more civil is and free"
* "Independence" in Poems of Nature (1895)
* "Independence" in The Writings of Henry David Thoreau (1906) Vol. 5
# Independent Coal Coke Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
274 U.S. 640
Independent Coal Coke Company v. United States
Argued: April 26, 1927. --- Decided: May 31, 1927
Mr. Mahlon E. Wilson, of Salt Lake City, Utah, for petitioner Independent Coal & Coke Co.
Mr. Frank K. Nebeker, of Washington, D. C., for petitioner Carbon County Land Co.
The Attorney General and Mr. Alfred A. Wheat, of Washington, D. C., for the United States.
[Argument of Counsel from page 641 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice STONE 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
# Interstate Commerce Commission v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company Pennsylvania Railroad Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 175
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company Pennsylvania Railroad Company
Argued: Dec. 9, 1957. ---
Motion to Clarify Judgment Denied June 2, 1958, 356 U.S. 970, 78 S.Ct. 1133.
Messrs. Robert W. ginnane and Issaac K. Hay, Washington, D.C., for appellant Interstate Com. Com'n.
Messrs. Guernsey Orcutt, Richard R. Bongartz, Philadelphia, Pa., and William Pepper Constable, Baltimore, Md., for appellant Pennsylvania R. Co.
Messrs. Sidney Goldstein, New York City, Francis A. Mulhern, Newark, N.J., Arthur L. Winn, Jr., J. Stanley Payne and Samuel H. Moerman, Washington, D.C., for appellants Erie R. Co. and others.

## 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
# Interstate Commerce Commission v. Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe Railway Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
234 U.S. 294
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe Railway Company
Argued: January 14 and 15, 1914. --- Decided: June 8, 1914
[Syllabus from pages 294-296 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Blackburn Esterline and Solicitor General Davis for the United states.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 296-299 intentionally omitted]
Mr. P. J. Farrell for the Interstate Commerce Commission.
Messrs. Gardiner Lathrop, Fred H. Wood, Robert Dunlap, T. J. Norton, C. W. Durbrow, W. F. Herrin, and J. P. Blair for appellees.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 299-302 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Hughes 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
# Interstate Commerce Commission v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company

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

## Concurring Opinion

    Douglas
United States Supreme Court
383 U.S. 576
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. et al.
Argued: Dec. 6, 1965. --- Decided: March 22, 1966
Robert W. Ginnane, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
J. Edgar McDonald, New York City, for respondents.
Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Interstate Commerce Commission v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company/Concurrence Douglas

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Douglas
United States Supreme Court
383 U.S. 576
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. et al.
Argued: Dec. 6, 1965. --- Decided: March 22, 1966
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS concurs in the result.
Mr. Justice BLACK took no part in the consideration or 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
# John Wycliff, last of the schoolmen and first of the English reformers/Preface

Published by G. P. Putnam's Sons, in New York.
HE plan on which this volume has been written, and (I trust) the excuse for adding one more to the considerable number of recent works on Wyclif, are perhaps sufficiently indicated in the first few chapters, and particularly in the fourth. It might not have been worthwhile to rewrite the story of this English worthy of the fourteenth century, even with the encouragement of a few fresh facts and sidelights to develop and illustrate his character, if it had not been for the opportunity thus afforded of doing something to popularise the picture of John Wyclif as an Oxford Schoolman, and the picture of the Schoolmen in general as pioneers of the Reformation of Religion and the Revival of Learning.
In a volume not specially intended for laborious students, it would scarcely have been appropriate to enter on a detailed examination of Wyclif's scholastic and controversial writings. Such a work remains to be accomplished, but it cannot well be undertaken until the Wyclif Society has completed its task. For a similar reason I have not introduced a full
L. S.