Summary
The 1872 case, In Re Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1872) [83 U.S. 36 (Wall.)], the U.S. Supreme Court in response to appeal of Supreme Court of Louisiana decision on three cases reviewed under “An act to protect the health of the City of New Orleans, to locate the stock landings and slaughter-houses, and to incorporate 'The Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter- House Company" enacted 8 March 1869, and enforced 1 June the same year offers precedent to municipal ordinances for the control of keeping or slaughter “any cattle, beeves, calves, sheep, swine, or other animals, or to have, keep, or establish any stock-landing, yards, pens, slaughter-houses, or abattoirs at any point or place within the city of New Orleans” (U.S. Supreme Court 83 U.S. 36 (1872) [83 U.S. 36 (Wall.)], 1872).
Appellate court referral of the Supreme Court of Louisiana ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court follows complaint by the plaintiffs in error.
The Facts
The first, a butchers association representation, the second the Attorney General, and finally, the corporation itself all claim that those assertions and privileges and their enforcement must be subject to further definition; that the corporation should be protected from competition with licensure limits within the same district, including rules to erection of suitable facilities and their operations; and that the corporation right to restraint of the defendants in carrying on “similar” business in violation of the “alleged exclusive privileges” assigned the entity at question. The facts, judicial opinion and court decision are reviewed in IRAC (Issues, Rule of Law, Analysis, Conclusion) analysis of the case (Table1).
Summary
The case Lochner v. People of the State of New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) 198 U.S. 45 is U.S. Supreme Court overturns the decision of an appellate case with a number of dissenting opinions; a plaintiff indicted and convicted by the State of New York courts for misdemeanor violation of labor [198 U.S. 45, 46] law statute.
In Lochner v. People of the State of New York, a U.S. Supreme Court writ of error is reviewed. Initiated in the county court of Oneida county and appealed in the State of New York Supreme Court, the case is reversal of the indictment and conviction of the plaintiff cited in the federal Supreme Court appellate decision.
The Facts
Repeated violation of State of New York labor laws by the owner of a bakery in the City of Utica where he required an employee to work in excess of sixty hours a week. The facts, judicial opinion and court decision are reviewed in IRAC (Issues, Rule of Law, Analysis, Conclusion) analysis of the case (Table 2).
Summary
In Nebbia v. People of the State of New York, 291 U.S. 502 (1934) 291 U.S. 502, the U.S. Supreme Court reviews appellant request for 14th amendment consideration of unrestricted privileges in business operations in response to a criminal conviction for violation of pricing controls in New York State.
Appellate case referred from the County Court of Monroe County, New York in Nebbia v. People of State of New York 291 U.S. 502 (1934) is a U.S. Supreme Court review of a 14th amendment complaint in response to conviction New York State Milk Control Board's pricing scheme under Agriculture and Markets Law N.Y. (Consol. Laws, c. 69) 312.
The Facts
The plaintiff, Nebbia requests review of conviction in response to pricing violations at his store in Monroe County, New York. The facts, judicial opinion and court decision are reviewed in IRAC (Issues, Rule of Law, Analysis, Conclusion) analysis of the case (Table 3).
Summary
The case Ferguson, Attorney General of Kansas, et al. v. Skrupa, 372 U.S. 726 (1963) 372 U.S. 726 is a U.S. Supreme Court ruling of 14th amendment application in consideration of debt adjustment practices by corporate parties ‘doing business as’ (DBA).
Appeal of the Kansas appellate decision in the favor of Skrupa, a DBA business cited for violation of debt adjusting rules in the State of Kansas, in the U.S. Supreme Court reversal supports the complaint that designation of lawyer and non-lawyer parties in debt adjusting practices determines rules to such services under federal law.
The Facts
The State of Kansas appeal in the interest of limiting debt adjusting activities to lawyers under the Equal Protection [372 U.S. 726, 733] law counters Skrupa’s complaint that the due process clause the 14th amendment has been violated, where prohibition rather than regulatory decisions are said to be the action of a lawful business. The facts, judicial opinion and court decision are reviewed in IRAC (Issues, Rule of Law, Analysis, Conclusion) analysis of the case (Table 4).
References
Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U.S. 726 (1963) 372 U.S. 726. U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from: http://laws.findlaw.com/us/372/726.html
Lochner v. People of the State of New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) 198 U.S. 45. U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from: http://laws.findlaw.com/us/198/45.html
Nebbia v. People of the State of New York, 291 U.S. 502 (1934) 291 U.S. 502. U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from: http://laws.findlaw.com/us/291/502.html
The Butcher’s Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter-House Company. In Re Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1872) 83 U.S. 36 (Wall.). U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from: http://laws.findlaw.com/us/83/36.html
