green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.7 score
“jurisdiction of the subject-matter is the power to deal with the general subject involved. in other words, the court must have cognizance of the class of cases to which the one to be adjudicated belongs.”
Treatment trajectory · 1942 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1942
1984
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Black v. Arizala
jurisdiction of the subject-matter is the power to deal with the general subject involved. in other words, the court must have cognizance of the class of cases to which the one to be adjudicated belongs.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Keys
See id. at 298 (differ- entiating “ ‘jurisdiction to render the particular judgment assailed’ ” from subject-matter and personal jurisdiction) (quoting Garner v. Alexander, 167 Or 670, 674 , 120 P2d 238 (1941), cert den, 316 US 690 (1942) (Garner quoting Forest G.
discussed
Cited "see"
Deaver v. United States
See Glover v. United States, 5 Cir., 125 F.2d 291, 293 , certiorari denied 316 U.S. 690 , 62 S.Ct 1280 , 86 L.Ed. 1761 ; LeMore v. United States, 5 Cir., 253 F. 887 , certiorari denied 248 U.S. 586 , 39 S.Ct. 184 , 63 L.Ed. 434 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Garner
v.
Alexander
v.
Alexander
No. 1164.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 25, 1942.
Messrs. I. H. Van Winkle, Attorney General of Oregon, and Willis S. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: Oregon Supreme Court (1)
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Oregon denied. Mr. Joseph A. Roney for petitioner.