Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Appleby Et Al. v. Delaney, Commissioner

• 1925 • 271 U.S. 403 • Taft Court
In the case of Appleby et al. v. Delaney, Commissioner (1925), the plaintiffs were owners and operators of a ferry service between New York and New Jersey who sought to prevent enforcement of an order by the Interstate Commerce Commission that would require them to file annual reports with the commission as well as adhere to its regulations regarding accounts, records, and memoranda. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Delaney, upholding that such regulation was within Congress's power under...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taft Court
Term: 1925
Docket: 16
271 U.S. 403
46 S. Ct. 581
70 L. Ed. 1009
1926 U.S. LEXIS 876
Argued: Oct 07, 1925

Appleby Et Al. v. Delaney, Commissioner

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Appleby et al. v. Delaney, Commissioner (1925), the plaintiffs were owners and operators of a ferry service between New York and New Jersey who sought to prevent enforcement of an order by the Interstate Commerce Commission that would require them to file annual reports with the commission as well as adhere to its regulations regarding accounts, records, and memoranda. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Delaney, upholding that such regulation was within Congress's power under the commerce clause because it had jurisdiction over navigation on waters forming a continuous highway for interstate trade or travel. Therefore, even though ferries operated wholly within one state but carried passengers traveling from one state to another could be regulated by federal law.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Appleby et al. v. Delaney, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a New York law prohibiting non-citizens from owning or leasing land for more than five years violated both the Fourteenth Amendment and international treaties between the U.S. and other countries guaranteeing equal property rights to citizens of those nations residing in America. The dissent contended that this law unjustly discriminated against foreigners by denying them basic property rights solely based on their citizenship status, which is contrary to principles of equality under American constitutional law as well as international agreements promising reciprocal treatment of foreign nationals' property rights in each country involved.

Opinion written by Justice WHTaft
Decided: Jun 01, 1926
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms