Noble State Bank v. Haskell
Citations
- 219 U.S. 575
- 31 S. Ct. 299
- 55 L. Ed. 341
- 1911 U.S. LEXIS 1654
Syllabus
<p>Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing in Noble State Bank v. Haskell, ante, p. 104, denied.</p> <p>Even where powerful arguments can be made against the wisdom of legislation this .court can say nothing, as it is not concerned therewith.</p> <p>Among the public uses for- which private property'may be taken are some which, if looked at only in their immediate aspect according to the approximate effect of the taking, may seem to be private. Clark v. Nash, 198 U. S. 361; Strickley v. Highland Boy Mining Co., 200 U. S. 527.</p> <p>Payments required by a bank guarantee statute which can be avoided by going out of the banking business, and are required only as a condition for keeping on in such business from corporations created by the State, do not amount to a taking of private property without compensation or a deprivation of property without due process of law; and so held as to the Oklahoma Bank Guarantee statute heretofore sustained as to its constitutionality, ante, p. 104.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “We fully understand the practical importance of the question, and the very powerful argument that can be made against the wisdom of the legislation, but on that point we have nothing to say, as it is not our concern.”
- “We fully understand the practical importance of the question, and the very powerful argument that can be made against the wisdom of the legislation, but on that point we have nothing to say, as it is not our concern.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Holmes
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
24 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. SummersTexas Supreme Court· 2009-04-03· cited 758×
- Richard M. Villarreal v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco CompanyEleventh Circuit· 2016-10-05· cited 146×
- Maresca v. CuomoNew York Court of Appeals· 1984-12-31· cited 111×
- Marie Patterson v. Georgia Pacific, LLCEleventh Circuit· 2022-07-05· cited 104×
- State v. Mountain Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1913-10-06· cited 89×
- Placek v. EdstromNebraska Supreme Court· 1947-03-07· cited 53×
- Myers v. TOOJAY'S MANAGEMENT CORP.Eleventh Circuit· 2011-05-17· cited 42×
- Mosko v. DunbarSupreme Court of Colorado· 1957-04-01· cited 24×
- Lowell Co-operative Bank v. Co-operative Central BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1934-06-30· cited 24×
- Rubi v. 49'er Country Club Estates, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1968-04-23· cited 21×
- State Ex Rel. Osage County Savings & Loan Ass'n v. WortenSupreme Court of Oklahoma· 1933-10-17· cited 21×
- Ambler Realty Co. v. Village of EuclidN.D. Ohio· 1924-01-14· cited 19×
- Wallace v. Hudson-Duncan & Co.Ninth Circuit· 1938-09-20· cited 17×
- Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Ass'n v. AndrusW.D. Virginia· 1980-01-21· cited 15×
- Alabama & N. O. Transp. Co. v. DoyleE.D. Michigan· 1914-01-28· cited 15×
- United States v. Chemical Foundation, Inc.D. Delaware· 1924-01-03· cited 15×
- Opinion of the Justices to the SenateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1932-02-16· cited 13×
- Hirsh v. BlockDistrict of Columbia· 1920-06-02· cited 13×
- Pascagoula Nat. Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank of AtlantaN.D. Georgia· 1924-12-19· cited 8×
- First State Bank v. SmithSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1926-02-24· cited 8×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.