Darlington v. Mager
This text of 256 U.S. 682 (Darlington v. Mager) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Affirmed with costs, upon authority of the Act of February 24, 1919, c. 18, § 213a, 40 Stat., 1057,; 1065; Act of September 8, 1916, c. 463, § 2 (a), 39 Stat. 756, 757; Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U. S. 509; Eldorado Coal & Mining Co. v. Mager, 255 U. S. 522; Goodrich v. Edwards, 255 U. S. 527; and Walsh v. Brewster 255 U. S. 536. Mr. Herbert Pope, with whom Mr. RusnC. Butler, Mr. James J. For stall and Mr. E. B. Prettyman were on the brief, for plaintiff in error. The Solicitor General for defendant in error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
256 U.S. 682, 41 S. Ct. 533, 65 L. Ed. 1169, 1921 U.S. LEXIS 1299, 4 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 4745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darlington-v-mager-scotus-1921.