Volume 306 — United States Reports

Washingtonian Publishing Co. v. Pearson, 306 U.S. 30 (1939), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the Copyright Act of 1909's deposit requirement did not require immediate deposit, or deposit before infringement occurs, in order to bring a suit for infringement.

Held: as did the Texas Supreme Court, that the old bank, so far as it had accepted payment of the trustee’s personal debts from his personal account, with notice that the payments had their source in trust funds, had become liable for tne trustee’s misappropriations by reason of- its participation in them.

Held: such cooperation does not involve unlawful concert, plan, or design, or cooperation to commit an unlawful act or to commit acts otherwise lawful with the intent to violate a statute. In no aspect of the case have the appellants standing to maintain the suit and the bill was properly dismissed. The decree is Affirmed.

from pages 188-190 intentionally omitted] Mr. Benjamin E. Carter, of Texarkana, Ark., for petitioner. Messrs. Wm. C. Fitzhugh and Henry C. Walker, Jr., both of Shreveport, La., for respondent.

Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States, 306 U.S. 208 (1939), is a 1939 decision of the United States Supreme Court finding an antitrust price-fixing conspiracy based on what subsequently came to be known a hub-and-spoke conspiracy.

National Labor Relations Board v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corporation, 306 U.S. 240 (1939), is a United States Supreme Court case on labor laws in which the Court held that the National Labor Relations Board had no authority to order an employer to reinstate workers fired after a sit-down strike, even if the employer's illegal actions triggered that strike.

Held: that under the Constitution and Act of Congress the judgment is entitled to no more credit in Ohio than is accorded to it in New York and that in New York the judgment is impeachable for petitioner’s fraud in prosecuting the suit, knowing that he had no interest in the cause of action sufficient to enable him to maintain it.

NLRB v. Columbian Enameling & Stamping Co., 306 U.S. 292 (1939), is a US labor law case where the US Supreme Court held 5-to-2 that the National Labor Relations Act required decisions of the National Labor Relations Board (Board) to be based on substantial evidence. The Supreme Court overturned a ruling of the Board (requiring an employer to rehire striking workers) for not being based on substantial evidence. The Court also held that only the representative of the workers (the union) could issue collective bargaining proposals under the law, and that proposals transmitted by a third party did not trigger the Act's protections or duties.

Taylor v. Standard Gas and Electric Company, 306 U.S. 307 (1939), was an important United States Supreme Court case in United States corporate law that laid down the "Deep Rock doctrine" as a rule of bankruptcy and corporate law. This holds that claims, as creditors, upon an insolvent subsidiary company by controlling shareholders or other insiders, like managers or directors, will be subordinated to the claims of all other creditors.

National Labor Relations Board v. Sands Manufacturing Co., 306 U.S. 332 (1939), is United States labor law case, decided by a majority of 5 to 2 by the Supreme Court of the United States, which overturned a decision by the National Labor Relations Board because it was not supported by substantial evidence. The Court defined collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act to mean that proposals and responses to proposals were pending, and that future meetings were being planned. Absent such conditions, bargaining was not occurring. The Court also held that an employer did not violate the Act if it chose to deal with the employees on an individual basis.

Held: are not within our proyince. 5 To find that the decedent could not, on self-serving grounds, elect to make his home in Texas “where he in fact had no residence” and yet to retain the bill and dispose of it on its merits amounts, in effect, to a declaration of rights on behalf of the estate which could not be adjudicated otherwise than through the screen of a controversy between states.

Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission, 306 U.S. 493 (1939), was a conflict of laws case decided by the United States Supreme Court that held that principles of federalism overcome the Full Faith and Credit Clause if a state enforces its own laws on events occurring within the state.

Held: and we concur, that, under the law of Pennsylvania, the transfer in question constituted a de jacto merger, even though the transfer did not comply with all the provisions of the Act of 1874, 14 and that, as matter of law, the taxpayer would be liable for the debts of the transferor.