Interstate Amusement Co. v. Albert
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE. The facts are stated in the opinion. Plaintiff in error was not engaged,in doing business in Tennessee. Therefore, the decision of the court below is ■ without support in law, and operates to deprive the company of its property without due process of law. There is no evidence to support the judgment and no basis for the conclusion that the company did business in Tennessee as contemplated by the Act.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE. The facts are stated in the opinion. Plaintiff in error was not engaged,in doing business in Tennessee. Therefore, the decision of the court below is ■ without support in law, and operates to deprive the company of its property without due process of law. There is no evidence to support the judgment and no basis for the conclusion that the company did business in Tennessee as contemplated by the Act. Railroad v. Albers Commission Co., 223 U. S. 573; Creswell v. Knights of Pythias, 225 U. S. 246; Wood v. Chesborough, 228 U. S. 678; Railroad…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Pitney
Plaintiff in error recovered a judgment in one of the courts of the State of Tennessee upon a cause of action that arose out of a written contract, dated May 24, 1909, whereby it agreed to “engage and book” for the firm of Catron & Albert, then operating a theater in Chattanooga, Tennessee, a certain number of “vaudeville acts” each week for certain weeks in each year, during the continuance of the contract, in consideration of the payment weekly of a “booking fee” of ten dollars and a commission of 5% upon the salary of each performer. It appeared that plaintiff in error was a corporation of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Paul v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Bank of Augusta v. EarleSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Hooper v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- North Carolina Railroad v. ZacharySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Williams v. FearsSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Minneapolis Civic & Commerce Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Johnson Creative Arts, Inc. v. Wool Masters, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1984
- Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. City of NewportSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Bothwell v. Buckbee-Mears CoSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.