...this opinion, the costs in this court to be equally divided between the parties. THE CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or the decision of this case. McRETNOLDS, J., dissenting. MR. JUSTICE MCREYNOLDS dissenting. It seems to me quite clear that the...

...writ of mandamus. Ex parte Roe, 234 US 70. Rule discharged and petition dismissed. MR. JUSTICE DAY took no part in the consideration or the decision of this case. ARMOUR & COMPANY ET AL. v. CITY OF DALLAS ETAL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES...

...writ of mandamus. Ex parte Roe, 234 US 70. Ride discharged and petition dismissed. MR, JUSTICE DAY took no part in the consideration or the decision of this case. ARMOUR & COMPANY ET AL. ». CITY OF DALLAS ETAL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES...

...234 US 70, 34 Sup. Ct 722, 58 L. Ed. 1217. Rule discharged, and petition dismissed. Mr. Justice DAY took no part In the consideration or the decision of this case. (255 Ü. 3. 280) ARMOUR & CO. et al. V. CITY OF DALLAS et al. (Argued Jan. 18, 1921. Decided Feb. 28,...

...form by Group Health. In this aspect the case is very like Columbia River Packers Assn. v. Hinton, 315 US 143. What was there decided requires a holding...operation of the Sherman Act. The judgments are Affirmed. Syllabus. UNITED STATES EX REL. MARCUS ET AL. v. HESS ET AL.* CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS...

...of that testamentary fancy to the full extent ssessed by the Commissioner is what § 302 (f ) taxes. Affirmed. MR. JUSTICE MURPHY and MR. JUSTICE JACKSON took no part in lie consideration or decision of this case. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE STONE and MR. JUSTICE EGBERTS, dissenting...

...of that testamentary fancy to the full extent assessed by the Commissioner is what § 302 (f) taxes. Affirmed. MR. JUSTICE MURPHY and MR. JUSTICE JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE STONE and MR. JUSTICE ROBERTS, dissenting:...

...Group Health. In this aspect the case is very like Columbia Rirer Packers Association. Inc., v. Hinton, 315 US 143. What was there decided requires a holding...Sherman Act. The judgments are affirmed. Mr. Justice MUKPHY and Mr. Justice JACKSON took nu part lu the consideration or the decision of this case. A true...

...Group Health. In this aspect the case is very like Columbia River Packers Association, Inc., v. Hinton, 315 US 143. Wha't was there decided requires a holding...activities were not exempted by the Clayton and the Norrls-LaGuardla Acts from .the operation of the Sherman Act. Mr. Justice MORPHY and Mr. Justice JACKSON...

...the definition of political activity and § 15.39 The judgment of the District Court is accordingly Affirmed. MR. JUSTICE MURPHY and MR. JUSTICE JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. MR. JUSTICE RUTLEDGE dissents as to Poole for the reasons...