The Langdon Cheves: Lamb, 4 L. Ed. 525 (1819). · Go Syfert
The Langdon Cheves: Lamb, 4 L. Ed. 525 (1819). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“social security 18 proceedings are inquisitorial rather than adversarial. it is the alj's duty to investigate the facts and develop the arguments both for and against granting 19 benefits....”
9 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: (SS)Gutierrez v. Commissioner of Social Security (caed, 2023-10-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) (SS)Gutierrez v. Commissioner of Social Security
E.D. Cal. · 2023 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
social security 18 proceedings are inquisitorial rather than adversarial. it is the alj's duty to investigate the facts and develop the arguments both for and against granting 19 benefits....
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Greiner v. Democratic National Committee
E.D. Wash. · 2024 · confidence medium
Id. at 11, ¶ 65. 15 “Second, there must be causation—a fairly traceable connection between the 16 plaintiff's injury and the complained-of conduct of the defendant.” Steel Co., 523 17 U.S. at 103 (1998) (citing Simon v. E.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robinson v. Arizona, State of
D. Ariz. · 2023 · confidence medium
“If an officer has probable cause to 12 believe that an individual has committed even a very minor criminal offense in his 13 presence, he may, without violating the Fourth Amendment, arrest the offender.” Atwater 14 v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354 (2001). 15 Following a warrantless arrest, a judicial determination of probable cause is required 16 “as a prerequisite to extended restraint on liberty following arrest.” Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 17 U.S. 103, 114 (1975).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The Langdon Cheves.—Lamb, Claimant
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 16, 1819.
4 L. Ed. 525
This cause was argued by Mr. .Hunter, and Mr. Wheaton for the appellant and claimant,a and by the Attorney General for the United States.
Story.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 69%
Citer courts: E.D. California (1)
Mr. Justice Story

delivered the opinion of the Court. This case differs in no essential respect, from, that of the Caledonian. The'brig sailed from the United States on a voyage to Lisbon, with a cargo of provisions, in May, 1813, and was captured by a British sloop of war, and sent into Bermuda, where she was either not proceeded against as prize, or was acquitted on trial; and after a detention of about six weeks, was permitted to resume her original voyage; and on the return, voyage from Lisbon, with a cargo of salt, was, on her arrival at Newport, on the 16th of December, 1813, seized by the collector of that port, as forfeited tp the United States jure belli, for using a British license, and trading with the enemy.

There is no positive proof, that the brig had a British license on board; but, we think, that under the. circumstances, there arises a violent presumption that she had such a license, and'that the burthen of proof to repel this presumption rests on the claimant. He has not attempted this in the slightest degree, there being a total absence of all evidence in his favour; and, therefore, as the case remains with all its original imperfections, the decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed, with costs.

Decree affirmed, with costs.