US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

CONNOLLY V. UNION SEWER PIPE CO., 184 U. S. 540 (1902)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 184 U. S. 540 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 U.S. 540 (1902)

Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Company

No. 48

Argued April 22-23, 1901

Decided March 10, 1902

184 U.S. 540


If a claim is made in the circuit court that a state enactment is invalid under the Constitution of the United States, and that claim is sustained or rejected, this Court may review the judgment at the instance of the unsuccessful party.

If the alleged combination in this case was illegal, it would not follow that they could, at common law, refuse to pay for pipes bought for them under special contracts.

The contracts between the plaintiff and the respective defendants were collateral to the agreement between the plaintiff and other corporations, etc., whereby an illegal combination was formed for the sale of sewer pipe.

The first special defense in this case, based alone upon the principles of the common law, was properly overruled.

The special defense, based upon the Act of Congress of July 2, 1890, 26 Stat. 209, was also properly rejected. That act does not declare illegal or void any sale made by such combination or its agents of property acquired for the purpose of being sold, such property not being at the time in the course of transportation from one state to another, or to a foreign country, and the buyer could not refuse to comply with his contract of purchase upon the ground that the seller was an illegal combination, which might be restrained or suppressed in the mode prescribed by the act of Congress.

The case is stated in the opinion of the court. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 184 U. S. 541

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™