Monge v. Smyth, 351 U.S. 976 (1956). · Go Syfert
Search
Monge v. Smyth, 351 U.S. 976 (1956). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
73 citation events across 18 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: American Mail Line, Ltd. v. United States (wawd, 1962-12-19)
Treatment trajectory · 1956 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1956 1991 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" American Mail Line, Ltd. v. United States
W.D. Wash. · 1962 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sword Line, Inc. v. United States, 351 U.S. 976 (June 11, 1956), 76 S.Ct. 1047 , 100 L.Ed. 1493 , where admiralty jurisdiction was upheld in an identical cause of action on the authority of Arehawski v. Hanioti, supra. 11 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Curcio v. United States
SCOTUS · 1957 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also, Trock v. United States, 351 U. S. 976 ; Emspak v. United States, 349 U. S. 190 ; Singleton v. United States, 343 U. S. 944 ; Greenberg v. United States, 343 U. S. 918 . 3 Pulford v. United States, 155 F. 2d 944, 947 ; Lumber Products Assn. v. United States, 144 F. 2d 546, 553 ; Carolene Products Co. v. United States, 140 F. 2d 61, 66-67 ; United States v. Illinois Alcohol Co., 45 F. 2d 145, 149 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Sam Courtney (2×)
2d Cir. · 1956 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Emspak v. United States, 349 U.S. 190 , 75 S.Ct. 687 , 99 L.Ed. 997 , and Trock v. United States, 351 U.S. 976 , 76 S.Ct. 1048 , reversing United States v. Trock, 2 Cir., 232 F.2d 839 , on the authority of Hoffman v. United States, supra. 3 As we think the defendant was within his constitutional rights in refusing to answer, he was not guilty of contempt. 3 4 Reversed.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Monge
v.
Smyth, Collector of Internal Revenue
No. 697.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 11, 1956.
351 U.S. 976
Wareham C. Seaman for petitioner. Solicitor General Sobeloff, Assistant Attorney General Rice and Hilbert P. Zarky for respondent.
Published

Appeal from and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Per Curiam:

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The petition for writ of cer-tiorari is denied.