Volume 272 — United States Reports

Held: That- a disposition of enemy patents, made at private sale to a corporation organized for the purposes of taking' over and holding them as a trustee for American industries affected, of eliminating hostile alien interests and advancing, chemical and allied industries in the United States through licenses .under the patents free to the United States and upon equal terms to others, was within, the authority granted ’…

Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926), was a United States Supreme Court decision ruling that the President's exclusive power to remove executive branch officials is vested in the Office of the Presidency by Article Two of the United States Constitution, and the Take Care Clause generally limits Congress from restricting this power. Myers was the first Supreme Court case to invalidate a federal law for violating the separation of powers by allowing Congress to "participate in the exercise of [the removal power]". The Taft Court's broad view of the President's "constitutional duty of seeing that the laws be faithfully executed" was limited in Humphrey's Executor v. United States (1935) to "purely executive" offices. In Seila Law LLC v.

Held: lawful to make non-beverage liquor; United States may elect to proceed under § 3450 or § 26. United States v. Haynes (S. D. Fla., 1920), 268 Fed. 1003 . Held, § 26 covers every case of illegal transportation of liquor, and § 3450 inconsistent with it. Affirmed, 1921, by C. C. A., 5th Cir., 274 Fed. 926 .

Held: that the second of the alternative stipulations was enforceable even if the first was not. P. 356. 61 Ct. Cls. 40, reversed. Certiorari ( 270 U. S. 637 ), to review a judgment of the Court of Claims rejecting the claim of the above, named tribe of Indians for compensation'for a tract of land in Minnesota embracing the Red Pipe Stone Quarries, which had been appropriated by the United States. See also, 53 Ct.

Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926), commonly known as Euclid v. Ambler, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court found that local ordinance-style zoning was a valid exercise of the police power. It was the first significant case regarding the relatively new practice of zoning, and bolstered zoning in the United States and influenced other countries.

Held: that the logs had begun their continuous interstate journey with the beginning of their drive down the river, not with their subsequent transfer to the vessels. Pp. 473, 475. 3.

United States v. General Electric Co., 272 U.S. 476 (1926), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding (per Chief Justice Taft) that a patentee who has granted a single license to a competitor to manufacture the patented product may lawfully fix the price at which the licensee may sell the product.

Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. United States, 272 U.S. 533 (1926), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the statute limiting all appeals of cases from the United States Court of Claims to questions of law was constitutional.

Held: When a corporation -has unlawfully acquired all the stock of a competitor, but not its plant or other property, the order properly directs it to divest itself of the stock ownership in such wise as will restore competition, and not leave the corporation in control of the competitor’s property, as .would happen if it first used the stock to secure such control, and then divested itself of the stock by dissolving the…

Lambert v. Yellowley, 272 U.S. 581 (1926), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that reaffirmed the National Prohibition Act's limitation on the dispensation of alcoholic medicines. The five-to-four decision, written by Justice Louis D. Brandeis, affirmed the dismissal of a suit in which New York City physician Samuel Lambert sought to prevent Edward Yellowley, the acting federal prohibition director, from enforcing the Prohibition Act so as to preclude him from prescribing alcoholic medicines.

Napier v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., 272 U.S. 605 (1926), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Boiler Inspection Act has so occupied the field of regulating locomotive equipment on interstate highways that state legislation requiring cab curtains and automatic firebox doors is precluded and must be addressed by the Interstate Commerce Commission.

Held: The purpose of the latter section is preventive; abatement of the nuisance and the injunction are not an additional penalty. 2. Hence, acquittal in a prosecution under § 21, is not a bar to proceedings under § 22. P. 831. Response to questions certified by the Circuit Court of Appeals, upon review of a decree abating a nuisance and closing the place in which it was maintained. ' Messrs.

Held: The purpose of the proviso is to carve out a special class of cases, and it must be confined, by a strict construction, to the cases clearly within its purpose. P. 639. (2) If the proviso relates to any conspiracies under Crim. Code § 37, it is limited to those to commit the substantive offenses which it covers. It does not apply to a conspiracy to defraud the United States in respect of internal revenue. P. 639.