United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150 (decided May 6, 1940): important antitrust case which holds that price fixing agreements (here, between oil companies as to tank car prices) are per se illegal under the Sherman Act; famous for its footnote 59, which notes that it is not necessary that there be power to fix prices, nor intent, nor even any overt act (I suppose there still must be “winking”)
Paige v. Banks, 80 U.S. 608 (decided May 6, 1872): I didn’t know that the appointed reporter of decisions (of the Court of Chancery, at the time the highest court in New York) could have a copyright on his manuscripts of the decisions. Here, Mr. Paige (of “Paige's Chancery Reports”, who served as reporter while moonlighting as a state senator) lost his copyright by failing to give notice of renewal. He died in 1868, and the Court of Chancery was abolished in 1847. Currently the highest court is called the Court of Appeals, and after 30 years of practice in that state I have as much chance of appearing in that court as I do of getting into a time machine and having Mr. Paige transcribe my arguments.
In re Kansas Indians, 72 U.S. 737 (decided May 6, 1867): a state can’t tax Native Americans on reservations
Mathis v. United States, 391 U.S. 1 (decided May 6, 1968): IRS investigator conducting a “routine tax investigation” must given Miranda warnings because the person was in prison (for an unrelated offense)
Fok Yung Yo v. United States, 185 U.S. 296 (decided May 6, 1902): courts can’t review decision of customs official to deport Chinese citizen
Sayward v. Denny, 158 U.S. 180 (decided May 6, 1895): Supreme Court doesn’t automatically accept writs of error from state courts; it decides by itself whether a federal question is involved, and if so, it must be central to the case
Schware v. Board of Examiners of New Mexico, 353 U.S. 232 (decided May 6, 1957): details a bar applicant’s complicated history, including past membership in the Communist Party and being forced to take an alias to forestall anti-Jewish prejudice. The Court held that New Mexico wrongfully denied his license in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. An interesting opinion to read.
Konigsberg v. State Bar of California, 353 U.S. 252 (decided May 6, 1957): denial of Equal Protection to deny bar admission due to articles published criticizing the Korean War, past membership in the Communist Party and refusal to answer questions about political affiliations; no showing that he advocated government overthrow (people got denied on much lighter grounds; in the 1990s the New York Law Journal -- the world’s most boring newspaper, which every N.Y. attorney was required to read every day -- ran a more or less innocuous series of reminiscences by Mordecai Rosenfeld, “Backhanded View of the Law”, but I remember one with real bite, as to being flunked at a Good Character interview because he did work for a group headed by Eleanor Roosevelt)
Federal Power Comm'n v. Sunray DX Oil Co., 391 U.S. 9 (decided May 6, 1968): The Federal Power Commission (now the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) must set prices (and issue certificates) allowing producers to sell to pipelines so as to benefit consumers, but at the same time, if it sets prices too high, the producers simply won't produce. This complicated decision by Harlan (which is pre-Chevron) is a course in itself on how the administrative state dealt with the oil industry. It holds that the “pipeline proceeding” set up by the FPC was proper and affirms the resulting decision as to pricing and refunds.
Tigner v. Texas, 310 U.S. 141 (decided May 6, 1940): overruling Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 1902 (summarized here on March 10) and holding that state statute exempting agricultural/livestock producers from antitrust did not violate Equal Protection (due to changed economy requiring cooperation between farmers)
Comments