Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Miller Vs. Mckenzie

Miller vs Mckenzie

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1870
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/81912

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
77 U.S. 582
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

Miller

Respondent

Mckenzie

Excerpt

miller v. mckenzie - 77 u.s. 582 (1870) u.s. supreme court miller v. mckenzie, 77 u.s. 10 wall. 582 582 (1870) miller v. mckenzie 77 u.s. (10 wall.) 582 error to the district court for the northern district of mississippi syllabus a writ of error dismissed as defective in respect to parties where the suit was against four persons by name, and the writ recited that it was against two which it named, "and others." pitzer miller brought suit in the court just named against larkin mckenzie, james hamer, joseph hamer, and ezekiel wall, to recover the value of several bales of cotton. page 77 u. s. 583 such proceedings were had that a judgment was rendered for the defendants, whereupon the plaintiff brought this writ of error, the writ reciting that the proceedings were between "peter miller, larkin mckenzie, and others." mr. justice nelson delivered the opinion of the court. it appears, from an inspection of the record that the writ of error is defective in respect to the parties. it is therein recited that the proceedings are between pitzer miller and larkin mckenzie and others. this defect has been held so many times in this court as fatal to its jurisdiction that it need be but mentioned to require a dismissal of the case. motion granted.

Full Judgment

Miller v. McKenzie - 77 U.S. 582 (1870)
U.S. Supreme Court Miller v. McKenzie, 77 U.S. 10 Wall. 582 582 (1870)

Miller v. McKenzie

77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 582

ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI

SYLLABUS

A writ of error dismissed as defective in respect to parties where the suit was against four persons by name, and the writ recited that it was against two which it named, "and others."

Pitzer Miller brought suit in the court just named against Larkin McKenzie, James Hamer, Joseph Hamer, and Ezekiel Wall, to recover the value of several bales of cotton.

Page 77 U. S. 583

Such proceedings were had that a judgment was rendered for the defendants, whereupon the plaintiff brought this writ of error, the writ reciting that the proceedings were between "Peter Miller, Larkin McKenzie, and others."

MR. JUSTICE NELSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

It appears, from an inspection of the record that the writ of error is defective in respect to the parties. It is therein recited that the proceedings are between Pitzer Miller and Larkin McKenzie and others. This defect has been held so many times in this Court as fatal to its jurisdiction that it need be but mentioned to require a dismissal of the case.

Motion granted.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial