Legal Opinion

Pollock v. Williams

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 10, 1944No. 345PublishedCited by 101 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Jackson

Appellant Pollock questions the validity of a statute of the State of Florida making it a misdemeanor to induce advances with intent to defraud by a promise to perform labor and further making failure to perform labor for which money has been obtained prima facie evidence of intent to defraud.1 It conflicts, he says, with the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution and with the antipeonage statute enacted by Congress thereunder. Claims also are made under the due process and equal *6protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment which we find it unnecessary to consider.

Pollock was…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Lisenba v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Chambers v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  3. Norris v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. Bailey v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  5. Clyatt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by101 opinions

  1. United States v. PetrilloSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. United States v. KozminskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. International Union, U. A. W. A., A. F. of L., Local 232 v. Wisconsin Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Alabama State Federation of Labor v. McAdorySupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  5. City of Memphis v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

96 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API