Porter Vs. Foley

Porter vs Foley

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1858

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/80812

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/80812
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1858
Case Number: 62 U.S. 393
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Porter

Respondent

Foley

Excerpt

.....court has already decided at the present term ( see page 62 u.s. 195|195 of this volume) that a writ of error made returnable on the third monday in january, and the defendant in error cited to appear on that day, is irregular and must be dismissed. a motion to remand the case to the court below, with leave to amend the writ of error and citation, cannot be granted. but if the plaintiff in error desires it, he may, in order to save expense, withdraw the transcript, and use it in connection with the proper and legal process to bring the case here. page 62 u. s. 394 a motion was made to dismiss the writ, upon the ground stated in the opinion of the court. mr. chief justice taney delivered the opinion of the court. the writ of error in this case was issued on the 27th day of december last, and made returnable on the third monday in january, and the defendant in error cited to appear on that day. it has already been decided at the present term, in the case of insurance co. of the valley of virginia v. mordecai, that such a writ of error cannot be supported, and does not bring the case before the court. a motion has been made, on behalf of the plaintiff in error, to remand the case to the court below, with leave to amend the writ of error and citation. but, as the transcript stands, there is no case before us in which we can exercise a power of amendment. we can do nothing more than dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. but if the plaintiff desires it, he may, in order to save expense, withdraw the transcript, and use it in connection with the proper and legal process to bring the case here, and if withdrawn, a receipt for it must be left with the clerk. but as it now stands, it must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Full Judgment

Porter v. Foley - 62 U.S. 393 (1858)
U.S. Supreme Court Porter v. Foley, 62 U.S. 21 How. 393 393 (1858)

Porter v. Foley

62 U.S. (21 How.) 393

ERROR TO THE COURT OF

APPEALS OF KENTUCKY

SYLLABUS

This Court has already decided at the present term ( see page 62 U.S. 195|195 of this volume) that a writ of error made returnable on the third Monday in January, and the defendant in error cited to appear on that day, is irregular and must be dismissed.

A motion to remand the case to the court below, with leave to amend the writ of error and citation, cannot be granted. But if the plaintiff in error desires it, he may, in order to save expense, withdraw the transcript, and use it in connection with the proper and legal process to bring the case here.

Page 62 U. S. 394

A motion was made to dismiss the writ, upon the ground stated in the opinion of the Court.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY delivered the opinion of the Court.

The writ of error in this case was issued on the 27th day of December last, and made returnable on the third Monday in January, and the defendant in error cited to appear on that day.

It has already been decided at the present term, in the case of Insurance Co. of the Valley of Virginia v. Mordecai, that such a writ of error cannot be supported, and does not bring the case before the Court.

A motion has been made, on behalf of the plaintiff in error, to remand the case to the court below, with leave to amend the writ of error and citation. But, as the transcript stands, there is no case before us in which we can exercise a power of amendment. We can do nothing more than dismiss it for want of jurisdiction.

But if the plaintiff desires it, he may, in order to save expense, withdraw the transcript, and use it in connection with the proper and legal process to bring the case here, and if withdrawn, a receipt for it must be left with the clerk.

But as it now stands, it must be

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Same Parties Porter vs Foley Same Subject Education