Volume 358 — United States Reports

Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that denied the school board of Little Rock, Arkansas the right to delay racial desegregation for 30 months. On September 12, 1958, the Warren Court delivered a decision that held that the states are bound by the Court's decisions and must enforce them even if the states disagree with them, asserting the judicial supremacy established in Marbury v. Madison (1803). The decision in this case upheld the rulings in Brown v. Board of Education and Brown II that had held that the doctrine of separate but equal was unconstitutional.

Held: "The statute thus aims to penalize only those who use interstate commerce with a view toward accomplishing the unlawful purposes. . . . An intention that the women or girls shall engage in the conduct outlawed by § 2 must be found to exist before the conclusion of the interstate journey and must be the dominant motive of such interstate movement. And the transportation must be designed to bring about such result.

United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Memphis Light, Gas, and Water Division, 358 U.S. 103 (1958), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court interpreted the Natural Gas Act of 1938 (NGA) as allowing a gas supply company to unilaterally modify a rate in a natural gas supply contract if the contract specified that the rate was that of the rate schedule filed with the Federal Power Commission (FPC) and the gas company filed a new rate schedule. This case clarified the Mobile-Sierra doctrine established by United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mobile Gas Service Corp. (1956) and its companion case Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co.

from pages 153-154 intentionally omitted] Mr. William W. Goodrich, New York City, for petitioner. Messrs. J. Hardin Peterson, Lakeland, Fla., and J. Lewis Hall, Tallahassee, Fla., for respondents. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of the Court. 1 Commercially grown Florida and Texas oranges have for many years been colored with a red coal-tar color.

Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217 (1959), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the State of Arizona does not have jurisdiction to try a civil case between a non-Indian doing business on a reservation with tribal members who reside on the reservation, the proper forum for such cases being the tribal court.

from pages 242-243 intentionally omitted] Mr. Kenneth C. Royall, New York City, for appellants. Mr. Philip Elman, Washington, D.C., for appellee. Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court. 1 This civil Sherman Act 1 case was here four years ago on direct appeal from a dismissal by the District Court, which had held that the Act did not apply to the business of professional boxing.

Held: caused the topping-lift cable to be subjected to 'excessive and abnormal strain,' which in turn caused the cable to break and the boom to fall on Crumady. Id., at pages 819, 820—821. 20 Next, the Court of Appeals turned to the setting of the circuit breaker, 'a new theory of the ship's unseaworthiness' which the court found had been 'adopted' by the trial court on its own initiative. Id., at page 819.

Held: and it is but common sense to hold, that a physical asset may fluctuate in value according to the income it can be made to produce. A live horse is worth more than a dead one, though the physical object may be the same, and a smooth-going automobile is worth more than an unassembled collection of all its parts.

from pages 450-451 intentionally omitted] Mr. Joseph A. Maun, St. Paul, Minn., for appellant in No. 12. Mr. Perry Voldness, St. Paul, Minn., for appellee in No. 12. Mr. Ben F. Johnson, Atlanta, Ga., for petitioner in No. 33. Mr. John Izard, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for respondent in No. 33.

Cammarano v. United States, 358 U.S. 498 (1959), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that business may not deduct expenses they incurred for the "promotion or defeat of legislation" as "ordinary and necessary" business expenses on their federal income tax filing.

Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. Bowers, 358 U.S. 522 (1959), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that exempting non-residents from a state tax on storing property in warehouses was constitutional. According to the Court, the state was allowed to attract out-of-state business, and the exemption was a rational means for that end.

Held: in the landmark case of Brown v. State of Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419, 6 L.Ed. 678, that one who had imported goods for the purpose of selling them, had, 'by payment of the duty to the United States, (acquired the) right to dispose of his merchandise, as well as to bring it into the country' (id., 12 Wheat. at page 442), and that the State could not tax it 'while remaining the property of the importer, in his warehouse,…

from 597 intentionally omitted] Mr. J. Ward O'Neill, New York City, for the petitioners. Mr. Bernard Chazen, Hoboken, N.J., for the respondents. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court. 1 On the evening of December 5, 1952, the motor vessel Tungus docked at Bayonne, New Jersey, with a cargo of coconut oil in its deeptanks.