OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# National Labor Relations Board v. Virginia Electric & Power Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
314 U.S. 469
National Labor Relations Board v. Virginia Electric & Power Company
Argued: Nov. 13, 1941. --- Decided: Dec 22, 1941
Messrs. Francis Biddle, Atty. Gen., and Robert B. Watts, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Messrs. T. Justin Moore and George D. Gibson, both of Richmond, Va., for respondent Virginia Electric & Power Co.
Messrs. William Earle White, of Petersburg, Va., and Paul E. Hadlick, of Washington, D.C., for respondent Independent Organization of Employees of the Virginia Electric & Power Co.
Mr. Justice MURPHY 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
# National Labor Relations Board v. Washington Aluminum Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 9
National Labor Relations Board v. Washington Aluminum Company
Argued: April 10, 1962. --- Decided: May 28, 1962
Dominick L. Manoli, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Robert R. Bair, 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
# National Labor Relations Board v. Warren Company Incorporated

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
350 U.S. 107
National Labor Relations Board v. Warren Company Incorporated
Argued: Oct. 20, 1955. --- Decided: Dec 12, 1955
Mr. David P. Findling, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. John Wesley Weekes, Decatur, Ga., for respondent.
Mr. Chief Justice WARREN 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
# National Labor Relations Board v. Walton Manufacturing Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
369 U.S. 404
National Labor Relations Board v. Walton Manufacturing Company
Argued: March 19 and 20, 1962. --- Decided: April 9, 1962
Norton J. Come, Washington, D.C., for petitioner in Nos. 77 and 94.
Robert T. Thompson, Atlanta, Ga., for respondents in No. 77.
Mr. O. R. T. Bowden, Jacksonville, Fla., for respondent in No. 94.
PER CURIAM.

## 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
# New York Constitution of 1846/Article 9

Adopted January 1, 1847
ARTICLE IX.
Section 1. [Education funds preserved; how applied.]—The capital of the common-school fund, the capital of the literature fund, and the capital of the United States deposit fund shall be respectively preserved inviolate. The revenues of the said common-school fund shall be applied to the support of common schools; the revenues of the said literature fund shall be applied to the support of academies; and the sum of twenty-five thousand dollars of the revenues of the United States deposit fund shall each year be appropriated to and made a part of the capital of the said common-school fund.
# New York County National Bank v. Massey

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
192 U.S. 138
New York County National Bank v. Massey
Argued: December 11, 1903. --- Decided: January 4, 1904
Messrs. Latham G. Reed, John M. Bowers, and Bowers & Sands for appellant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 138-140 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Louis Sturcke, Albert P. Massey, and Hill, Sturcke, & Andrews for appellee.
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
# New York Elevated v. Fifth National Bank of the City of New York

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
118 U.S. 608
New York Elevated v. Fifth National Bank of the City of New York
Wm. H. Arnoux and
Wm. F. MacRae, for the motion.
Henry H. Anderson and Julien T. Davies, in opposition.
WAITE, C. J.
This is a motion to dismiss on the ground that the matter in dispute does not exceed the sum or value of $5,000. The suit was brought by the Fifth National Bank of the City of New York against the New York Elevated Railroad Company to recover damages for injuries to real estate. A trial was had which resulted in a verdict against the railroad company, on the ninth of June, 1886, for $5,000. At the time of the rendition of the ver dict the railroad company moved for a new trial. This motion was denied on the tenth of August, and on the twenty-sixth of the same month a judgment was entered for $5,068.33; that being the amount of the verdict, with interest added to the date of the judgment. The claim now made is that the value of the matter in dispute is to be determined by the verdict, without the interest.
The rule is settled what when a writ of error is sued out from this court by the defendant below, and no question is presented growing out of a partial defense to the action, or a counter-claim or a set-off, the value of the matter in dispute is fixed by the amount of the judgment. Gordon v. Ogden, 3 Pet. 33; Hilton v. Dickinson, 108 U.S. 165; S.C.. 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 424; Henderson v. Wadsworth, 115 U.S. 276; S.C.. 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 40. Our jurisdiction cannot be in voked until after a final judgment, and, until such a judgment has been rendered, the cause remains in the full judicial control of the court in which it is pending. It was because of this that we declined to take jurisdiction in Thompson v. Butler, 95 U.S. 694, where the verdict was for more than $5,000, but reduced to that amount, by leave of the court, before the judgment, which was for the reduced sum. It is true that our jurisdiction depends on the amount of the judgment, exclusive of interest thereon, (Knapp v. Banks, 2 How. 73; W. U. Tel. Co. v. Rogers, 93 U.S. 566,) but here the interest accrued before judgment, and not after. In The Patapsco, 12 Wall. 451, jurisdiction was taken in a case where the decree was for $1,982, 'and interest from the date of the report,' which made more than $2,000 due at the time of the decree; that being then the jurisdictional limit.
As the jurisdiction has once attached, it cannot be defeated by a waiver or release of the amount in excess of $5,000. The motion to dismiss is denied.
FIELD, J., took no part in this decision.

## 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
# New York Continental Jewell Filtration Company v. District of Columbia

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
223 U.S. 253
New York Continental Jewell Filtration Company v. District of Columbia
Argued: December 22, 1911. --- Decided: February 19, 1912
Mr. James H. Hayden for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Edward H. Thomas for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice McKenna delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# New York Dock Company v. The Poznan

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
274 U.S. 117
New York Dock Company v. The Poznan
Argued: March 15, 1927. --- Decided: April 11, 1927
Messrs. A. J. Feild and Joseph S. Auerbach, both of New York City, for petitioner.
Messrs. George Whitefield Betts, Jr., and Mark W. Maclay, both of New York City, for respondent.
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
# New York World

newspaper published in New York from 1860 until 1931.
Sort by date, title, or other :
| Date | Title | Author |
| 1906-11-25November 25, 1906 | Shall We Banish the Electric Chair and the Gallows, as France has banished the Guillotine | |
| 1908-06-19July 19, 1908. | What I Believe | Emma Goldman |
| 1909-02-07June 7, 1909 | A Comparison of America and Europe | Leo Tolstoi |
# New York ex rel. Amoskeag Savings Bank of Manchester New Hampshire v. Purdy

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
231 U.S. 373
New York ex rel. Amoskeag Savings Bank of Manchester New Hampshire v. Purdy
Argued: December 4 and 5. 1912. --- Decided: December 1, 1913
Messrs. Maxwell evarts and George Richards for plaintiff in error.
Messrs.
[Argument of Counsel from page 374 intentionally omitted]
[375]
William Herbert King, Lawson Purdy, and Archibald R. Watson for defendants in error.
Mr. Justice Pitney 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
# New York Weekly Digest

The New York Weekly Digest is a periodical, published in 28 volumes from 1876 to 1888. Also called the N. Y. Weekly Digest.
* Volume 1 (1876) External scan External scan
* Volume 2 (1876) (transcription project)
* Volume 3 (1877) External scan External scan External scan
* Volume 4 (1877) External scan External scan External scan
* Volume 5 (1878) External scan External scan External scan
* Volume 6 (1878) External scan
* Volume 7 (1879) IA External scan
* Volume 19 (1884) IA
* Volume 27 (1888) IA
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
# New York and Baltimore Transportation Company v. Philadelphia and Savannah Steam Navigation Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
63 U.S. 461
New York and Baltimore Transportation Company v. Philadelphia and Savannah Steam Navigation 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
# Mulford v. Smith

United States Supreme Court
307 U.S. 38
Mulford v. Smith
Argued: March 8, 1939. --- Decided: April 17, 1939
[Syllabus from pages 38-40 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. A. J. Little, of Valdosta, Ga., and L. E. Heath, of Douglas, Ga., for appellants.
Messrs. Robert H. Jackson, Sol. Gen., and Robert K. McConnaughey, of Dayton, Ohio, for the United States.
Mr. Omer W. Franklin, of Valdosta, Ga., for appellees Smith et al.
Mr. Justice ROBERTS 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
# Mulcahey v. Catalanotte

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
353 U.S. 692
Mulcahey v. Catalanotte
Argued: March 27, 1957. --- Decided: June 3, 1957
See 354 U.S. 943, 77 S.Ct. 1391.
Mr.
Roger D. Fisher, Washington, D.C., for the petitioner.
Mr. Louis M. Hopping, Detroit, Mich., for the respondent.
Mr. Justice WHITTAKER 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
# Mulcrevy v. City and County of San Francisco

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
231 U.S. 669
Mulcrevy v. City and County of San Francisco
Argued: December 12 and 15, 1913. --- Decided: January 5, 1914
Messrs. James F. Tevlin, Samuel M. Shortridge, and L. A. Redman for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. J. F. English and Percy V. Long for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice McKenna delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

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

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
85 U.S. 342
Mulhall v. Keenan

## 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
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Encyclical Letter/Epistola Encyclica/Chapter 4

§4. Outrages on Good Friday and Easter Day, 339.
In addition to all this, after such a notable and illustrious entry into the city, the Arian Gregory, taking pleasure in these calamities, and as if desirous to secure to the heathens and Jews, and those who had wrought these evils upon us, a prize and price of their iniquitous success, gave up the church to be plundered by them. Upon this license of iniquity and disorder, their deeds were worse than in time of war, and more cruel than those of robbers. Some of them were plundering whatever fell in their way; others dividing among themselves the sums which some had laid up there; the wine, of which there was a large quantity, they either drank or emptied out or carried away; they plundered the store of oil, and every one took as his spoil the doors and chancel rails; the candlesticks they forthwith laid aside in the wall, and lighted the candles of the Church before their idols: in a word, rapine and death pervaded the Church. And the impious Arians, so far from feeling shame that such things should be done, added yet further outrages and cruelty. Presbyters and laymen had their flesh torn, virgins were stript of their veils, and led away to the tribunal of the governor, and then cast into prison; others had their goods confiscated, and were scourged; the bread of the ministers and virgins was intercepted. And these things were done even during the holy season of Lent, about the time of Easter; a time when the brethren were keeping fast, while this notable Gregory exhibited the disposition of a Caiaphas, and, together with Pilate the Governor, furiously raged against the pious worshippers of Christ. Going into one of the churches on the Preparation, in company with the Governor and the heathen multitude, when he saw that the people regarded with abhorrence his forcible entry among them, he caused that most cruel person, the Governor, publicly to scourge in one hour, four and thirty virgins and married women, and men of rank, and to cast them into prison. Among them there was one virgin, who, being fond of study, had the Psalter in her hands, at the time when he caused her to be publicly scourged: the book was torn in pieces by the officers, and the virgin herself shut up in prison.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Churches, as heathen temples before them, were used for deposits. At the sack of Rome, Alaric spared the Churches and their possessions; nay, he himself transported the costly vessels of St. Peter into his Church.
* ↑ ἐν τῷ τοιχί& 251·. [Reference uncertain.]
* ↑ ἀπομαφοριζόμεναι; see Sophocles’ Lexicon under μαφόριον
* ↑ Lent and Passion Week was the season during which Justina’s persecution of St. Ambrose took place, and the proceedings against St. Chrysostom at Constantinople. On the Paschal Vigils, vid. Tertull. ad Uxor. ii. 4. [Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. iv. p. 46] p. 426, note n. Oxf. Tr.
* ↑ παρασκευὴ, i.e., Good Friday. [Apr. 13, 339,] The word was used for Friday generally as early as S. Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. p. 877. ed. Pott. vid. Constit. Apostol. v. 13. Pseudo-Ign. ad Philipp. 13.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Encyclical Letter/Epistola Encyclica/Chapter 6

§6. All the above illegalities were carried on in the interest of Arianism.
Gregory then is an Arian, and has been sent to the Arian party; for none demanded him, but they only; and accordingly as a hireling and a stranger, he makes use of the Governor to inflict these dreadful and cruel deeds upon the people of the Catholic Churches, as not being his own. For since Pistus, whom Eusebius and his fellows formerly appointed over the Arians, was justly anathematized and excommunicated for his impiety by you the Bishops of the Catholic Church, as you all know, on our writing to you concerning him, they have now, therefore, in like manner sent this Gregory to them; and lest they should a second time be put to shame, by our again writing against them, they have employed extraneous force against me, in order that, having obtained possession of the Churches, they may seem to have escaped all suspicion of being Arians. But in this too they have been mistaken, for none of the people of the Church are with them, except the heretics only, and those who have been excommunicated on divers charges, and such as have been compelled by the Governor to dissemble. This then is the drama of Eusebius and his fellows, which they have long been rehearsing and composing; and now have succeeded in performing through the false charges which they have made against me before the Emperor. Notwithstanding, they are not yet content to be quiet, but even now seek to kill me; and they make themselves so formidable to our friends, that they are all driven into banishment, and expect death at their hands. But you must not for this stand in awe of their iniquity, but on the contrary avenge: and shew your indignation at this their unprecedented conduct against us. For if when one member suffers all the members suffer with it, and, according to the blessed Apostle, we ought to weep with them that weep, let every one, now that so great a Church as this is suffering, avenge its wrongs, as though he were himself a sufferer. For we have a common Saviour, who is blasphemed by them, and Canons belonging to us all, which they are transgressing. If while any of you had been sitting in your Church, and while the people were assembled with you, without any blame, some one had suddenly come under plea of an edict as successor of one of you, and had acted the same part towards you, would you not have been indignant? would you not have demanded to be righted? If so, then it is right that you should be indignant now, lest if these things be passed over unnoticed, the same mischief shall by degrees extend itself to every Church, and so our schools of religion be turned into a market-house and an exchange.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Apol. c. Ar. §§19, 24.
* ↑ Apol. c. Ar. 3.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xii. 26; Rom. xii. 15.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Incarnation of the Word
## Contents

* Introduction
* On the Incarnation of the Word
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XI/Chapter 32

Chapter 32.—Of the Opinion that the Angels Were Created Before the World.
But if some one oppose our opinion, and say that the holy angels are not referred to when it is said, “Let there be light, and there was light;” if he suppose or teach that some material light, then first created, was meant, and that the angels were created, not only before the firmament dividing the waters and named “the heaven,” but also before the time signified in the words, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth;” if he allege that this phrase, “In the beginning,” does not mean that nothing was made before (for the angels were), but that God made all things by His Wisdom or Word, who is named in Scripture “the Beginning,” as He Himself, in the gospel, replied to the Jews when they asked Him who He was, that He was the Beginning;—I will not contest the point, chiefly because it gives me the liveliest satisfaction to find the Trinity celebrated in the very beginning of the book of Genesis.  For having said “In the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” meaning that the Father made them in the Son (as the psalm testifies where it says, “How manifold are Thy works, O Lord! in Wisdom hast Thou made them all”), a little afterwards mention is fitly made of the Holy Spirit also. For, when it had been told us what kind of earth God created at first, or what the mass or matter was which God, under the name of “heaven and earth,” had provided for the construction of the world, as is told in the additional words, “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep,” then, for the sake of completing the mention of the Trinity, it is immediately added, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Let
each one, then, take it as he pleases; for it is so profound a passage, that it may well suggest, for the exercise of the reader’s tact, many opinions, and none of them widely departing from the rule of faith. At the same time, let none doubt that the holy angels in their heavenly abodes are, though not, indeed, co-eternal with God, yet secure and certain of eternal and true felicity. To their company the Lord teaches that His little ones belong; and not only says, “They shall be equal to the angels of God,” but shows, too, what blessed contemplation the angels themselves enjoy, saying, “Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones: for I say unto you, that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ Augustin refers to John viii. 25; see p. 195. He might rather have referred to Rev. iii. 14.
* ↑ Ps. civ. 24.
* ↑ Matt. xxii. 30.
* ↑ Matt. xviii. 10.