|
Castro v Seeberger, 40 F 531 (CA 7, Ill, 1890) (tax
case)
D'Estrinoz v Gerker, 43 Fed 285 (ED
Pa, 8
April 1890). SCB: GA 5251 (trade
practices case)
State v Heidenhain, 42 La Ann 483; 7 So 621; 21 Am
St Rep 388 (21 April 1890) (second
hand smoke (TTS) ban case pursuant to tobacco's then-known
adverse effects, to protect in public travel, the right to
fresh
and pure air)
Weener v Brayton, 152 Mass 101; 8 LRA 640 (24 June
1890) (fraudulent
use of label case)
Hamer v Sidway, 57 Hun 229; 11 NYS 182 (1 July
1890) (upholding a trust granting $5,000 to nephew on condition of
"refraining from the use of liquor and tobacco," upheld)
Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co v Reid Tobacco Co, 104
Mo 53; 24 Am St Rep 314 (Oct 1890) (trademark
infringement case)
School Dist of Ft. Smith v Maury, 53 Ark 471; 14
SW 669 (25 Oct 1890) (school
board authority to deal with smokers)
Herron v Dibrell, 87 Va 289; 12 SE 674 (8 Jan
1891)
In re Blumlein, Rosenwald, Cullmans, and Schubart, 45 F
236 (SD NY, 2 Feb 1891) (leaf
tobacco tax case)
Hamer v Sidway, 124 NY 538; 27 NE 256 (14 April
1891). SCB: 57 Hun 229; 11 NYS 182
McVey v Brendel, 144 Pa 235; 13 LRA 377 (5 Oct
1891) (business
practices label case)
In re Blumlein, 49 F 228 (SD NY, 5 Jan 1892) (leaf
tobacco tax case)
Field
v Clark, 143 US 649; 12 S Ct 495; 36 L Ed 294 (29 Feb 1892)
(tax case, constitutional challenge, alleging it didn't pass as text
was not in congressional journal)
Joseph v Macowsky, 96 Cal 518; 31 P 914 (30 Nov
1892) (trademark
misrepresentation case)
Sheldon and Castro v U. S., 5 CCA 282; 55 F
818 (CA 7, Ill, 11 Feb 1893) (tax
case, classification of tobacco scraps)
Isaacs
v Jonas, 148 US 648; 13 S Ct 677; 37 L Ed 596 (La, 10 April
1893) (tax case)
U.S.
v Isaacs, 148 US 654; 13 S Ct 679; 37 L Ed 598 (La, 10
April 1893) (tax case)
In re Blumlein, 5 CCA 142; 55 F 383 (CA 2, NY, 18 April
1893). SCB: 49 F 228 (leaf
tobacco tax case)
State v Johnson, 118 Mo 491; 24 SW 229 (7 Dec
1893)
Chicago, M.
& St. P. Ry. Co.
v Lowell, 151 US 209; 14 S Ct 281; 38 L Ed 131 (8 Jan 1894)
(smoker injury case, injured while ignoring a warning sign posted by
railroad)
Bonsack Machine Co v Elliott, 63 F 835 (SD NY, 4
April 1894) (patent
infringement case re cigarette machine)
Seeberger
v Castro, 153 US 32; 14 S Ct 766; 38 L Ed 624 (Ill, 16
April 1894) (tax
case). SCB: 40 F 531
Spalding
v Castro, 153 US 38; 14 S Ct 768; 38 L Ed 626 (16 April
1894) (tax case)
Western District Warehouse Co v Harris, 16 Ky L R
93 (30 May 1894) (uninsured
tobacco warehouse fire)
Metz v Hagerty, 51 Ohio St 521; 38 NE 11 (20 June
1894) (tax
case)
Bonsack Machine Co v National Cigarette Co, 64 F
858 (SD NY, 2 Oct 1894) (slightly different machine is not a contempt
of court issue, when patent office issues a patent)
Erhardt
v Schroeder, 155 US 124; 15 S Ct 325; 39 L Ed 94 (NY, 12
Nov 1894) (tax
case)
United States v Rosenwald, 67 F 323 (CA 2, 5 March
1895) (leaf tobacco
tax case)
State v Bishop, 128 Mo 212; 31 SW 9; 49 Am St Rep
569; 29 LRA 200 (12 May 1895) (misuse-of-union-label
case)
Bonsack Machine Co v S F Hess & Co, 68 F 119 (WD
Va, 28 May 1895) (cigarette machine royalty case)
Commercial Insurance Co v Friedlander, 156 Ill
595; 41 NE 183; 16 ALR3d 774 (15 June 1895) (fraud
allegations case)
Bonsack Machine Co v Elliott and National
Cigarette & Tobacco Co, 69 F 335 (CA 2, 28 June 1895) (patent
infringement case). SCB: 63 F 835
Re Minor, 5 Inters Com Rep 329; 69 F 233 (W
Va, 10 July 1895)
Bonsack Machine Co v Smith, 70 F 383 (WD NC, 28
Sep 1895) (patent and monopoly case)
Com v Mudgett, 4 Dist 739 (Pa,
30 Nov 1895) (smoker
mass
murder case)
Wright v Duke, 91 Hun 409; 36 NYS 853; 72 St R 375
(18 Dec 1895) (trade
case; defrauding partner when selling his interest, by concealing
a lucrative contract, impacting company value)
Com v Mudgett, 174 Pa 211; 34 A 588 (4 March
1896). SCB: 4 Dist 739
Richmond & Allegheny Ry Co v Patterson Tobacco Co,
92 Va 670; 24 SE 261 (12 March 1896)
State v Gerhardt, 145 Ind 439; 44 NE 469 (19 June
1896)
Iowa v McGregor, 76 F 956 (ND
Iowa, 23
July 1896)
Garrett v T. H. Garrett & Co, 24 CCA 173; 78 F 472
(CA 6, Ky,
8 Dec 1896) (business
practices case, alleging imitative labels and wrongful use of
trade name)
People v Duke, 19 Misc 292; 44 NYS 336 (Jan 1897)
Adam Roth Grocer Co v Lewis, 69 Mo App 446 (23 Feb
1897) (tobacco
ownership issue)
U.S.
v American Tobacco Co, 166 US 468; 17 S Ct 619; 41 L Ed
1081 (12 April 1897) (tax
stamps refund case)
State v Goetze, 43
W Va 495; 27
SE 225; 64 Am St Rep 871 (24 April 1897)
In re May, 82 F 422 (D Montana, 5 Aug 1897)
Sawrie v Tennessee, 82 F 615 (MD
Tenn,
30 Sep 1897)
McGregor v Cone, 104
Iowa 465;
73 NW 1041; 65 Am St Rep 522; 39 LRA 484 (24 Jan 1898)
Richmond &
Allegheny Ry Co
v Patterson Tobacco Co, 169 US 311; 18 S Ct 335; 42 L Ed
759 (21 Feb 1898). SCB: 92 Va 670; 24 SE 261
Schroeder v US, 87 F 201 (SD NY, 8 March 1898) (tax
case)
U.S.
v Lies, 170 US 628; 18 S Ct 780; 42 L Ed 1170 (NY, 23 May
1898) (tax case).
SCB: 38 US App 655; 20 CCA 651; 74 F 546
U.S. v Rothschild & Bro, 87 F 798 (SD NY, 27 May
1898) (tax
case)
Gundling v City of Chicago, 176 Ill 340; 52 NE 44;
48 LRA 230
(24 Oct 1898)
Austin v State,
101
Tenn 563; 48 SW 305; 70 Am St Rep 703; 50 LRA 478 (22 Dec 1898) (cigarette
ban)
Western Assurance Co v Ray, 105
Ky
523; 49 SW 326 16 ALR3d 774 (1 Feb 1899) (fraud
allegations case)
US v Schroeder, 33 CCA 376; 93 F 448 (CA 2, NY, 1
March 1899). SCB: 87 F 201 (tax
case)
Rickard v Du Bois, 97 F 96 (D Conn, 2 Aug 1899)
Blaufield v State, 103
Tenn
593; 53 SW 1090 (20 Nov 1899)
Central of Georgia Railway Co v Hammond, 109 Ga
383; 34 SE 594 (2 Dec 1899)
|
