Volume 315 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 315 of the United States Reports:

Held: The Commission’s order did not offend the Commerce Clause. The Commission was entitled to take into consideration the Company’s producing properties in Oklahoma and its transmission lines to Texas, because “the proved manner in which the gas from Okla *11 homa was treated and handled in Texas made it an integral part of the gas supplied to the Texas communities in appellant’s intrastate business.” 304 U. S. at 239 .

Held: arrested, or returned, or in any manner aids in the arrest or return of any person to a condition of peonage, shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.” 4 Georgia Code (1933), Title 38, §§ 415,416. 5 And cf. State v. Oliva, 144 La. 51 , 80 So. 195 ; Ex parte Hollman, 79 S. C. 9 , 60 S. E. 19 . 6 See note 3, supra.

Held: however, that a charge to a member for the use of a club’s golf course for a period of six months was not included within the words “dues or membership fees,” on the ground that they “were meant to cover only fixed and definite charges applicable to all members of each particular class of membership.” Weld v. Nichols, 9 F. 2d 977 .

Held: that this so-called lease in perpetuity without a defeasance clause divested respondent of all right, title and interest in the property and vested a full and indefeasible title in the grantee. See Huck v. Chicago & Alton R. Co., 86 Ill. 352 , 354 —355; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Boyd, 118 Ill. 73 , 7 N. E. 487 .

Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 (1942), is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on two issues of constitutional criminal procedure. Glasser was the first Supreme Court decision to hold that the Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment required the reversal of a criminal defendant's conviction if his lawyer's representation of him was limited by a conflict of interest.

United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co., 315 U.S. 110 (1942), was a major decision of the US Supreme Court upholding the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 as a valid use of Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.

United States v. Pink, 315 U.S. 203 (1942), was a United States Supreme Court decision related to the Litvinov Assignment, wherein the US government recognised Soviet Russia as the successor of the previous Russian government. The United States sued Louis H. Pink, the Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, for claims regarding the First Russian Insurance Company.

Held: what documents are necessary for a hearing, what asserted violations should be investigated, which employer will make full and free disclosure, which will act only under the conpulsion of a subpoena, and similar minutiae of daily administration.

Held: upon a long line of authority, that in applying this clause we are not bound by the state’s views as to whether there is a contract. Irving Trust Co. v. Day, 314 U. S. 556 . Take the case where the question is whether a promise made without consideration comes within the protection of the contract clause. Is there any doubt as to where we must go for the answer that we do not find in the Constitution itself?

Held: however, that the husband was taxable on a $40 weekly payment which he had agreed to make to his wife. But that fact did not make him taxable on income from the trust also, since the provision for weekly payments and the trust “were not so interrelated or interdependent as to make the trust a security for the *552 weekly payments.” p. 73.

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court articulated the fighting words doctrine, a limitation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.

Held: that there are items of cost or expense incurred in the establishment and development of the business during the seven-year period prior to regulation, which were not included in the companies’ estimate of value accepted by the Commission, and which, in view of the special characteristics of the business, should be capitalized and added to the rate base to the extent of $8,500,000 for going concern value.

Held: but no subsequent opinion or order has been issued. 1 Petitioners raise two contentions with respect to these I. C. C. proceedings and their bearing upon the present suit. First, they contend that it was reversible error for the District Court to admit in evidence a copy of the 1937 opinion of the Commission.

Held: finally, that the order was too broad to be sustained. It is *648 argued that it was not confined to the land which was actually in excess of the 500-acre maximum but included all the properties of the respondent, and that it authorized the continued operation of the business by the receiver for an indefinite period.

Held: the original specification and claims treated the voluntary introduction of water into the reaction chamber as a necessary step in the *677 process, whereas such introduction is made permissive by the reissue. We agree with that court’s view that there is thus a difference between the procedure described in the two documents.

Tulee v. Washington, 315 U.S. 681 (1942), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the Washington statute prescribing license fees for fishing is invalid as applied to a Yakama convicted on a charge of catching salmon with a net without first having obtained a license, in view of the 1855 treaty at the Walla Walla Council securing to them the exclusive right of taking fish in all streams running through or bordering reservation and right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed places in common with citizens of Washington.