Henry v. Irwin
This text of 270 U.S. 636 (Henry v. Irwin) 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
Dismissed upon the authority of McCain v. Des Moines, 174 U. S. 168, 181; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Ann Arbor R. R. Co., 178 U. S. 239, 243; Spencer v. Duplan Silk Co., 191 U. S. 526, 530; Shulthis v. McDougal, 225 U. S. 561, 569; Hull v. Burr, 234 U. S. 712, 720; Norton v. Whiteside, 239 U. S. 144, 147; (2) California Powder Works v. Davis & Co., 151 U. S. 389, 393; Goar, Scott & Co. v. Shannon, 223 U. S. 468, 470; Consol. Turnpike Co. v. Norfolk & Ocean View R. R. Co., 228 U. S. 596, 599; Yazoo & Miss. Valley R. R. Co. v. Brewer, 231 U. S. 245, 249; Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern Realty Co., 244 U. S. 300, 303; Municipal Securities Corp. v. Kansas City, 246 U. S. 63; Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U. S. 255, 257; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U. S. 268, 271.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
270 U.S. 636, 46 S. Ct. 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-v-irwin-scotus-1926.