Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Barnette v. Wells Fargo Nevada National Bank

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 12, 1926No. 149Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Me. Justice Brandéis, with whom Me. Justice' Sanford

concurs, dissenting.

In my opinion, the decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals should be reversed with directions to the. District *447Court to remand the case to the state court, or this Court should, in its discretion, order that copies of all papers in the District Court relating to the removal be filed here, so that we may determine whether the lower courts have properly exercised jurisdiction. Compare order issued February 1, 1926, in Whitney v. California.

The determination of the jurisdiction of the courts below is one of the essential…

2Cases cited66 opinions

  1. Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  3. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. CoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  4. Byers v. McAuleySupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  5. Salem Trust Co. v. Manufacturers' Finance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924

61 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