Booth v. Norwegian Bark Eliza Lines, 194 U.S. 633 (1904). · Go Syfert
Search
Booth v. Norwegian Bark Eliza Lines, 194 U.S. 633 (1904). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“where the alteration or omission of the application would affect the rights of the parties, 'no tribunal has the right to say the statute does not apply”
4 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. Banerji (mass, 2006-12-13)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. Banerji
Mass. · 2006 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
where the alteration or omission of the application would affect the rights of the parties, 'no tribunal has the right to say the statute does not apply
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Henry P. Booth, Surviving Partner, etc.
v.
Norwegian Bark Eliza Lines, etc.
No. 627.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 18, 1904.
194 U.S. 633
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: #26,015 of 633,719
Citer courts: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial… (1)

April 18, 1904. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit granted. Mr. Lewis S. Dabney and Mr. Fred&dc Cunningham for petitioner.