Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell
the Supreme Court of the United States

Syllabus

related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that Minnesota's suspension of creditor's remedies was not in violation of the United States Constitution. Blaisdell was decided during the height of the Great Depression and has been criticized by modern conservative and libertarian commentators. Nevertheless, Blaisdell has never been explicitly overruled. Warning: template has been deprecated.

884596Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell — Syllabusthe Supreme Court of the United States

Court Documents

Opinion of the Court

United States Supreme Court

290 U.S. 398

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell

Argued: Nov. 8, 9, 1933. --- Decided: Jan 8, 1934

Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota.

[Syllabus from pages 398-400 intentionally omitted]

Messrs. Karl H. Covell and Alfred W. Bowen, both of Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 402-408 intentionally omitted]

Messrs. Harry H. Peterson and Wm. S. Ervin, both of St. Paul, Minn., for appellees.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 409-415 intentionally omitted]

Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES delivered the opinion of the Court.

Notes[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell

Notes[edit]

Navigation menu

Search