The Tidewater Case and Limited Jurisdiction of Federal Constitutional Courts

In the recent case of National Mutual Insurance Ca. v. Tidewater Transfer Co.,\u27 the Act of April 20, 1940, allowing citizens of the District of Columbia and of the territories to sue and be sued in the district courts on the basis of diverse citizenship, was held constitutional insofar as it applies to citizens of the District of Columbia. The practical effect of the decision, in allowing Congress to remove a basic inequality among citizens of the United States, is perhaps commendable. However, there are broad theoretical implications in this holding, emphasized by sharp debate among the justices, which could go far toward eliminating important limitations upon the capacity of federal courts to receive jurisdiction through congressional enactment. Some of the implications of the decision will be discussed in this Note, without attempting to give complete or positive answers to the questions raised or to treat fully the historical development of the federal court system. As a basis for this discussion certain postulates of constitutional law which have long been accepted as ultimate limitations upon the jurisdiction of the federal courts must be noticed

The Tidewater Case and Limited Jurisdiction of Federal Constitutional Courts

In the recent case of National Mutual Insurance Ca. v. Tidewater Transfer Co.,\u27 the Act of April 20, 1940, allowing citizens of the District of Columbia and of the territories to sue and be sued in the district courts on the basis of diverse citizenship, was held constitutional insofar as it applies to citizens of the District of Columbia. The practical effect of the decision, in allowing Congress to remove a basic inequality among citizens of the United States, is perhaps commendable. However, there are broad theoretical implications in this holding, emphasized by sharp debate among the justices, which could go far toward eliminating important limitations upon the capacity of federal courts to receive jurisdiction through congressional enactment. Some of the implications of the decision will be discussed in this Note, without attempting to give complete or positive answers to the questions raised or to treat fully the historical development of the federal court system. As a basis for this discussion certain postulates of constitutional law which have long been accepted as ultimate limitations upon the jurisdiction of the federal courts must be noticed

Federal Regulation of Independent Natural Gas Producers

In describing and evaluating area rate-making, Mr. Foy concentrates on its historical context. His discussion shows how conventional utility and railroad regulatory methods grew to fit the economic characteristics of the regulated industries. He traces the fluctuating standards of the federal fair value era and the modern end-result era, with emphasis on the Hope case, and analyzes the use of typical or representative costs in various types of group proceedings. Concluding that natural gas producers occupy a unique factual position, he warns that the FPC must continue to devise ingenious, pragmatic methodology, untrammelled by conventional regulatory concepts, if its regulation is to avoid crippling the industry and impairing the nation\u27s future gas supplies

Quantitative Flow Field Imaging about a Hydrophobic Sphere Impacting on a Free Surface

This fluid dynamics video shows the impact of a hydrophobic sphere impacting a water surface. The sphere has a mass ratio of m* = 1.15, a wetting angle of 110 degrees, a diameter of 9.5 mm, and impacts the surface with a Froude number of Fr = 9.2. The first sequence shows an impact of a sphere on the free surface illustrating the formation of the splash crown and air cavity. The cavity grows both in the axial and radial direction until it eventually collapses at a point roughly half of the distance from the free surface to the sphere, which is known as the pinch-off point. The second set of videos shows a sphere impacting the free surface under the same conditions using Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) to quantify the flow field. A laser sheet illuminates the mid-plane of the sphere, and the fluid is seeded with particles whose motion is captured by a high-speed video camera. Velocity fields are then calculated from the images. The video sequences from left to right depict the radial velocity, the axial velocity, and the vorticity respectively in the flow field. The color bar on the far left indicates the magnitude of the velocity and vorticity. All videos were taken at 2610 fps and the PIV data was processed using a 16 x 16 window with a 50% overlap.Comment: American Physical Society Division of Fluid Dynamics 2008 Annual Meeting Replaced previous version because abstract had LaTex markup and was too long, missing periods on middle initial of first two name

Information requirements for guidance and control systems

Control or guidance system performance dependency on information handling by subsystem