United States Reports

Paige v. Banks, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 608 (1872), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held an agreement that transfers a copyright from the original author to a second party for perpetuity does not end with the statutory limit of copyright at the time the parties made the deal. If a later act of Congress extends copyright and the extension is available to the work, the second party still controls the copyright or perpetual license to that copyright. This is a notable departure from the Statute of Anne, a 1709 law from Great Britain that was influential in the United States's copyright history.

Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 679 (1871), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the role of secular courts adjudicating ecclesiastical disputes. In Watson, the Court held that in adjudications of church property disputes: (1) courts cannot rule on the truth or falsity of a religious teaching, (2) where a previous authority structure existed before the dispute, courts should defer to the decision of that structure, and (3) in the absence of such an internal authority structure, courts should defer to the wishes of a majority of the congregation.

Baker v. Morton, 79 U.S. (12 Wall.) 150 (1870), was the second of two land claim suits to come out of Omaha, Nebraska Territory, filed in September 1860, prior to statehood. A claim jumper filed suit against local land barons to stake out a homestead in the area that was to become the city of Omaha. The case was important for establishing homesteaders' rights and ensuring that the future growth of Omaha would benefit everyone, not just wealthy landowners and speculators.

Knox v. Lee, 79 U.S. (12 Wall.) 457 (1871), was an important case for its time in which the Supreme Court of the United States overruled Hepburn v. Griswold. In Knox v. Lee, the Court held that making paper money legal tender through the Legal Tender Act did not conflict with Article I of the United States Constitution. Mrs. Lee was a loyal citizen of the United States whose flock of sheep was sold by the Confederate Army, as the Confederates considered Mrs. Lee an "alien enemy". Mr. Knox purchased the sheep from the Confederate army, and Mrs. Lee brought suit for trespass and conversion. The Court instructed the jury that whatever amount they awarded could be paid with legal tender notes of the United States. Mr.

Virginia v. West Virginia, 78 U.S. (11 Wall.) 39 (1871), is a 6–3 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that if a governor has discretion in the conduct of the election, the legislature is bound by his action and cannot undo the results based on fraud. The Court implicitly affirmed that the breakaway Virginia counties had received the necessary consent of both the Commonwealth of Virginia and the United States Congress to become a separate U.S. state. The Court also explicitly held that Berkeley County and Jefferson County were part of the new state of West Virginia.

Collector v. Day, 78 U.S. (11 Wall.) 113 (1871), was a United States Supreme Court case that questioned the United States Federal government's ability to impose a tax upon the "salary of a judicial officer of the State." Even though this particular case favors state employees' rights, it was overruled in 1939 by Graves v. New York, where the Supreme Court ruled that the income tax imposed by the State of New York on an employee of the Federal Home Owners Load Corporation was constitutional, since there was no requirement of immunity contained in the Constitution or in any act of Congress. Collector is still important to discussions of constitutional law because of Judge Nelson's statement of the doctrine of dual federalism in the case's opinion.

The Cherokee Tobacco Case, 78 U.S. (11 Wall.) 616 (1870), is a United States court case with implications relating to tribal sovereignty in the United States. Two Cherokee men, Elias C. Boudinot and Stand Watie, refused to pay taxes on tobacco manufactured in the Cherokee Nation, as required by the Internal Revenue Act 1868. They argued that they were exempt from paying taxes by the Cherokee Treaty of 1866. The Supreme Court decided against the men, stating that a law of Congress can supersede the provisions of a treaty. Boudinot and Watie, with the help of attorneys A. Pike, R. W. Johnson, and B.F. Butler, argued that they were exempt from paying the tax on tobacco.

The Daniel Ball, 77 U.S. 557 (1870), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning whether a given body of water was navigable. The Court's majority opinion, written by Justice Stephen J. Field, held that bodies of water that are "navigable in fact" are considered navigable for legal purposes. This holding contradicted existing British common law, which had defined navigability based on the ebb and flow of the tides.

Rubber Co. v. Goodyear, 76 U.S. (9 Wall.) 788 (1869), is an early decision of the United States Supreme Court recognizing the right of a patent owner to license another person to practice the invention only in a limited field, and holding that such a licensee committed patent infringement when it made and sold products of the invention outside that field.

Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 533 (1869), was a United States Supreme Court case.

Willard v. Tayloe, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 557 (1869), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that courts of equity deciding issues of contract have discretion to determine the form of relief based on the circumstances of each individual case. The Court established a new rule to determine the form of relief: Relief should serve the ends of justice, and should be withheld if it appears likely to produce hardship or injustice to either party.

Hepburn v. Griswold, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 603 (1870), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Chief Justice of the United States, Salmon P. Chase, speaking for the Court, declared certain parts of the Legal Tender Acts to be unconstitutional. Specifically, making United States Notes legal tender was unconstitutional.

Ex parte Yerger, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 85 (1869), was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that, under the Judiciary Act of 1789, it is authorized to issue writs of habeas corpus.

Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 168 (1869), is a U.S. corporate law decision by the United States Supreme Court. It held that a corporation is not a citizen within the meaning of the Privileges and Immunities Clause. Of greater consequence, the Court further held that "issuing a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce," effectively removing the business of insurance beyond the United States Congress's legislative reach (until partially overturned in United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association).

United States v. Kirby, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 482 (1868), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that statutes must be constructed reasonably.

Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506 (1869), was a United States Supreme Court decision in which the court held that Congress has the authority to withdraw the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction to review decisions of lower courts at any time. As such, the entirety of the court's appellate jurisdiction is determined by federal law.

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the Supreme Court of the U.S. in 1869. The case's notable political dispute involved a claim by the Reconstruction era government of Texas that U.S. bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit in the U.S. Supreme Court, given that, under the Constitution, that institution has original jurisdiction on certain cases in which a state is a party.

Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35 (1868), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court that affirmed that a state cannot inhibit people from leaving the state by taxing them. The decision was written by Justice Miller. Chief Justice Chase and Justice Clifford concurred.

Georgia v. Stanton, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 50 (1868), also called the Library Case, was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the court does not hold jurisdiction over the political question of enforcement of the Reconstruction Acts against the Southern States. The court did recognize its original jurisdiction in the matter and its ability to decide issues of the rights of persons or property. Nevertheless, the case before it was not one of persons or property, but the political question of whether the federal government could annul state governments and replace them with new ones. Since it found that the issue raised by the three Southern States was a political one, the court decided it did not possess jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case.

United States v. Hartwell, 73 U.S. 385 (1867), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court which defined the characteristics of an "Officer of the United States" as written in the Constitution, and also the scope of two federal embezzlement statutes. The Court held that an Officer, as opposed to a mere government employee, has a tenure, duration, emolument, and duties defined by law as opposed to by contract.

Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2 (1866), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled that the use of military tribunals to try civilians when civil courts are operating is unconstitutional. In this particular case, the Court was unwilling to give former President Abraham Lincoln's administration the power of military commission jurisdiction, part of the administration's controversial plan to deal with Union dissenters during the American Civil War. Justice David Davis, who delivered the majority opinion, stated that "martial rule can never exist when the courts are open" and confined martial law to areas of "military operations, where war really prevails", and when it was a necessity to provide a substitute for a civil authority that had been overthrown.

Pervear v. Massachusetts, 72 U.S. (5 Wall.) 475 (1866), was a case brought before the United States Supreme Court in 1866 over the issue of prisoners' rights. The court ruled that prisoners have no constitutional rights, not even Eighth Amendment rights. This was the first case stating the "hands off" policy that allowed states to run their prisons without federal interference. The application of the Bill of Rights to state action did not come until later and then only in part. At that time in history, the Bill of Rights was seen as a bar to federal interference with state actions, and therefore a means of ensuring federal restraint.

In re Kansas Indians, 72 U.S. (5 Wall.) 737 (1867), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the state of Kansas was not authorized to levy taxes on, and seize for forfeiture, lands which are set aside for Indian tribes by the United States government, under treaty or otherwise.

Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. 277 (1867), 4 Wall 277, 18 L. 350, also known as the Test-Oath case, is an 1867 landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the court held in a 5-4 decision that both state and national oath laws are unconstitutional. Cummings was a companion case of Ex parte Garland, which were also referred to as the Test-Oath Cases. Cummings involved Fr John A. Cummings, a Catholic priest who refused to take an anti-Confederacy oath that was required by the Missouri Constitution; the lower court found him guilty of perjury and sentenced to pay a $500 fine and imprisonment of not less than two years.

Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333 (1867), was an important United States Supreme Court case involving the disbarment of former Confederate officials.

Mississippi v. Johnson, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 475 (1867), was the first suit to be brought against a President of the United States in the United States Supreme Court. The state of Mississippi attempted to sue President Andrew Johnson for enforcing the Reconstruction Acts. The court decided, based on a previous decision of Marbury v. Madison that the President has two kinds of tasks: ministerial and discretionary. Discretionary tasks are ones the president can choose to do or not to do, while ministerial tasks are ones required by his office: those whose failure to perform could leave him in violation of the Constitution.

Ex parte Vallandigham, 68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 243 (1864), is a United States Supreme Court case, involving a former congressman Clement Vallandigham of Ohio, who had violated an Army order against the public expression of sympathy for the Confederate States and their cause. Vallandigham was tried before a military tribunal by Major General Ambrose E. Burnside for treason after he delivered an incendiary speech at Mount Vernon; he then appealed the tribunal's verdict to the Supreme Court, arguing that he as a civilian could not be tried before a military tribunal. In February 1864, the Supreme Court avoided ruling on the question by instead unanimously holding that they could not take appeals from military tribunals at all.

United States v. Johnson, 68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 326 (1863), was a United States Supreme Court case.

The Prize Cases, 67 U.S. (2 Black) 635 (1863), were a group of four United States Supreme Court cases that upheld President Abraham Lincoln's authority to blockade Southern ports during the American Civil War. The opinion in the case was written by Supreme Court Justice Robert Cooper Grier.

United States v. Jackalow, 66 U.S. (1 Black) 484 (1862), is a U.S. Supreme Court case interpreting the Venue and Vicinage clauses of the United States Constitution. It was an "unusual criminal case" and one of the few constitutional criminal cases from the Taney Court. Jackalow, a mariner from the Ryukyu Kingdom, was suspected of the robbery and murder of the captain of the sloop Spray, Jonathan Leete, and Jonathan's brother Elijah, while the ship was at sea. He was convicted of robbery in the Long Island Sound, but as there was disagreement over the question of jurisdiction between the two judges who heard the post-trial motion (Judge Mahlon Dickerson and Supreme Court Justice Robert Cooper Grier), the case was referred to the Supreme Court by certificate of division.

State of Alabama v. State of Georgia, 64 U.S. (23 How.) 505 (1860), is a unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the true border between the states of Alabama and Georgia was the average water mark on the western bank of the Chattahoochee River. In coming to its conclusion, the Court defined what constituted the bed and bank of a river. The case has had international repercussions as well. The Supreme Court's definition was adopted by courts in the United Kingdom in the case Hindson v. Ashby (1896) 65 LJ Ch. 515, 2 Ch. 27.

United States v. The Heirs of Francisco De Haro, 63 U.S. (22 How.) 293 (1860), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a plat made in 1853 of land adjudged to be covered by a Mexican grant, and confirmed in 1862, is sustained as the correct designation of the property covered by the grant.

New York ex rel. Cutler v. Dibble, 62 U.S. (21 How.) 366 (1858), was a companion case to the more well-known Fellows v. Blacksmith (1857). At the time Fellows was decided, this case had reached the U.S. Supreme Court but had not yet been argued.

Ableman v. Booth, 62 U.S. (21 How.) 506 (1859), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that state courts cannot issue rulings that contradict the decisions of federal courts, overturning a decision by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. The Court found that under the Constitution, federal courts have the final power to decide cases arising under the Constitution and federal statutes, and that the States do not have the power to overturn those decisions. Thus, Wisconsin did not have the authority to nullify federal judgments or statutes. For example, it is illegal for state officials to interfere with the work of U.S. Marshals acting under federal laws.

Dynes v. Hoover, 61 U.S. (20 How.) 65 (1858), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Congress's power to establish military tribunals under Article I is completely separate from its power to create Article III courts. As a result, a judgment of a military tribunal cannot be collaterally attacked with an appeal to Article III courts, and the scope of a defendant's rights is determined entirely by statutory interpretation or the customs of the military.

United States v. Le Baron, 60 U.S. 73 (1856), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the court held that an officer of the United States is appointed to his office when his commission is signed and seal by the President. The failure of the officeholder to receive such commission does not invalidate the appointment.

Fellows v. Blacksmith, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 366 (1857), is a United States Supreme Court decision involving Native American law. John Blacksmith, a Tonawanda Seneca, sued agents of the Ogden Land Company for common law claims of trespass, assault, and battery after he was forcibly evicted from his sawmill by the Company's agents. The Court affirmed a judgement in Blacksmith's favor, notwithstanding the fact that the Seneca had executed an Indian removal treaty and the Company held the exclusive right to purchase to the land by virtue of an interstate compact ratified by Congress.

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held that the United States Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and therefore they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens. The decision is widely considered the worst in the Supreme Court's history and is broadly denounced for its overt racism, judicial activism, and poor legal reasoning. It de jure nationalized slavery, and thus played a crucial role in the events that led to the American Civil War four years later.

Little v. Hall, 59 U.S. (18 How.) 165 (1856), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held a contract with state officials to be the official publisher of court opinion documents does not transfer any copyright to that publisher, and they may not seek an injunction against someone else printing those documents.

Den ex dem. Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improv. Co., 59 U.S. (18 How.) 272 (1856), was a case before the United States Supreme Court in which the court held that a distress warrant, issued pursuant to issued by the Solicitor of the Treasury under an act of Congress, was valid and constitutional. It was a use of an Article I tribunal.

Stevens v. Gladding, 58 U.S. 447 (1854), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the copyright of a work is not attached to the physical copperplate used to print the work, so purchasing the copperplate does not purchase the copyright.

Florida v. Georgia, 58 U.S. (17 How.) 478 (1854), was a United States Supreme Court case invoking the Court's original jurisdiction to determine boundary disputes between states. In this case the boundary dispute was between the State of Florida and the State of Georgia.

O'Reilly v. Morse, 56 U.S. (15 How.) 62 (1853), also known as The Telegraph Patent Case, is an 1854 decision of the United States Supreme Court that has been highly influential in the development of the law of patent-eligibility in regard to claimed inventions in the field of computer-software related art. It holds, essentially, that an abstract idea, apart from its implementation, is not patent-eligible.

Winans v. Denmead, 56 U.S. 330 (1854), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court established the doctrine of equivalents. It held that, even if the challenged device is not literally within the claims of the prior art's patent, the challenged device infringes if it arrives at the same result in the same way.

Le Roy v. Tatham, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156 (1852), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that "a newly discovered principle" cannot be patented, and no one can claim in it an exclusive right. This case is considered sometimes as the earliest example of patentable subject matter controversy in the US patent law. This controversy was finally rectified in the 2012 Mayo decision, that requires for a claim, comprising a "natural principle or a law of Nature" to have an additional "inventive concept", which limits the application of the principle to a particular use. The inventors had discovered the principle that hot, but congealed, lead under pressure would re-unite as an unbroken solid material, which permitted manufacture of a superior lead pipe.

Stephens v. Cady, 55 U.S. 528 (1853), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held a copyright is a property in notion, and has no corporeal tangible substance, so it cannot be seized or sold in an execution sale.

Cooley v. Board of Wardens, 53 U.S. (12 How.) 299 (1852), was a US Supreme Court case that held that a Pennsylvania law requiring all ships entering or leaving Philadelphia to hire a local pilot did not violate the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution. Those who did not comply with the law had been required to pay a fee.

Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, 52 U.S. (11 How.) 248 (1851), was a United States Supreme Court decision credited with introducing into United States patent law the concept of non-obviousness as a patentability requirement, as well as stating the applicable legal standard for determining its presence or absence in a claimed invention.

Strader v. Graham, 51 U.S. (10 How.) 82 (1851), was a US Supreme Court decision that held that the status of three slaves who went from Kentucky to Indiana and Ohio depended on Kentucky law, rather than Ohio law. The original plaintiff was Christopher Graham, whose three slaves had traveled to Cincinnati, Ohio, aboard a steamboat owned by Jacob Strader and James Gorman and piloted by John Armstrong. The slaves later escaped to Canada. The US Supreme Court recognized the authority of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 over its applicable territories in Strader v. Graham but did not extend the Northwest Ordinance to cover the states that were later admitted to the Union.

Sheldon v. Sill, 49 U.S. (8 How.) 441 (1850), is a ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that Congress may restrict the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts by limiting the subjects those courts may hear, even if those subjects fall within the federal judicial power defined by the United States Constitution.