Hill v. Wallace
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Taft
The first question for our consideration is whether, assuming the act to be invalid, the complainants on the *61face of'their bill state sufficient equitable grounds,to justify granting the relief they ask. We think it clear that within the cases of Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co., 255 U. S. 180; Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. R. Co., 240 U. S. 1, 10; Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, and Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331, 341, 346, the averments of the bill entitle them to relief against the Board of Trade of Chicago, its president and its directors. The bill shows that the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Brushaber v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by335 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Wickard v. FilburnSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Enochs v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. ButlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. CurranSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
330 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.