Legal Opinion
Ickes v. Fox
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 1, 1937No. Nos. 266—268PublishedCited by 166 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sutherland
The sole question in each of these three cases is whether the United States is an indispensable party de fendant. The suits were brought in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. That court, on motion of petitioner, deeming the presence of the United States to be indispensable, dismissed the bills as amended. Thereupon, by permission of the court, second-amended bills were filed. Petitioner renewed his motions to dismiss, which the court then denied. A special appeal was allowed by the court below, and resulted in an affirmance of the decree of the trial court. 66 App. D. C. 128; 85…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Philadelphia Co. v. StimsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Noble v. Union River Logging RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Tindal v. WesleySupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by166 opinions
- Feres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Larson v. Domestic and Foreign Commerce Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & GwinnWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- Land v. DollarSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Nevada v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
161 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.