Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Gold Clause Cases were a series of actions brought before the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the court narrowly upheld the Roosevelt administration's adjustment of the gold standard in response to the Great Depression.
The U.S. federal government had issued paper money known as United States Notes during the American Civil War, pursuant to the terms of the Legal Tender Act of 1862. In the 1869 case of Hepburn v. Griswold, the Court had held that parts of the Legal Tender Act violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
South-Eastern Underwriters Association, 322 U.S. 533 (1944), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Sherman Act, the federal antitrust statute, applied to insurance. To reach this decision, the Court held that insurance could be regulated by the United States Congress under the Commerce Clause, overturning Paul v
Bond coupons that promise to "pay in gold coin" Gold clauses in contracts allow a creditor the option to receive payment in gold or gold equivalent. A gold clause may prove valuable to the creditor in long term contracts, wherein questions may arise as to whether a currency in use at the time the contract was entered into would still have the same value when payment is due.
Knox v. Lee, 79 U.S. (12 Wall.) 457 (1871), was an important case for its time in which the Supreme Court of the United States overruled Hepburn v. Griswold. [1] In Knox v.. Lee, the Court held that making paper money legal tender through the Legal Tender Act did not conflict with Article I of the United States Constitut
1. Search your inbox for the subject line 'Get Started with AOL Desktop Gold'. 2. Open the email. 3. Click Download AOL Desktop Gold or Update Now. 4. Navigate to your Downloads folder and click Save. 5. Follow the installation steps listed below.
"Swift & Co. v. United States: The Beef Trust and the Stream of Commerce Doctrine," American Journal of Legal History (1984) 28#3 pp 244–279 in JSTOR Levin, Leslie A. "One Man's Meat Is Another Man's Poison: Imagery of Wholesomeness in the Discourse of Meatpacking from 1900–1910," Journal of American & Comparative Cultures (2001) 24#1‐2 ...
Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934), also called the Minnesota Mortgage Moratorium Case, was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that Minnesota's suspension of creditors' remedies was not in violation of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution. [1]