Mesa Vs. U S

Mesa vs U S

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1862

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/81135

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/81135
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1862
Case Number: 67 U.S. 721
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mesa

Respondent

U S

Excerpt

mesa v. u s - 67 u.s. 721 (1862) u.s. supreme court mesa v. u s, 67 u.s. 721 (1862) 67 u.s. 721 (black) mesa v. the united states. december term, 1862 this was a california land case, in which an appeal had been taken by the claimant and one clark, an intervenor. the appella ts suffered a term to pass without filing a copy of the record in this court, but at the second term brought up the transcript and had it docketed. mr. gillet, of washington city moved that the appeal be dismissed. mr. magraw, of pennsylvania, and mr. mcdougall of california, opposed the motion. per curiam. let this appeal be dismissed. it has not been prosecuted in the manner directed nor within the time limited by the act of congress, which requires that the transcript shall be filed at the next succeeding term after the appeal is taken

Full Judgment

MESA v. U S - 67 U.S. 721 (1862)
U.S. Supreme Court MESA v. U S, 67 U.S. 721 (1862)

67 U.S. 721 (Black)

MESA
v.
THE UNITED STATES.

December Term, 1862

This was a California land case, in which an appeal had been taken by the Claimant and one Clark, an intervenor. The appella ts suffered a term to pass without filing a copy of the record in this Court, but at the second term brought up the transcript and had it docketed.

Mr. Gillet, of Washington City moved that the appeal be dismissed.

Mr. Magraw, of Pennsylvania, and Mr. McDougall of California, opposed the motion.

PER CURIAM.

Let this appeal be dismissed. It has not been prosecuted in the manner directed nor within the time limited by the Act of Congress, which requires that the transcript shall be filed at the next succeeding term after the appeal is taken

Same Parties Mesa vs U S Same Subject Land Acquisition