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.

Micas Vs. Williams

Micas vs Williams

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1881
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/84177

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
104 U.S. 556
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

Micas

Respondent

Williams

Excerpt

micas v. williams - 104 u.s. 556 (1881) u.s. supreme court micas v. williams, 104 u.s. 556 (1881) micas v. williams 104 u.s. 556 motion to dismiss writ of error to the circuit court of the united states for the eastern district of louisiana syllabus where the record is such as to furnish a sufficient color of right to the dismissal of the writ of error to justify the court in entertaining with a motion to dismiss a motion to affirm under rule 6, held that although the grounds for dismissal be removed by a further showing, the motion to affirm will be granted when it is manifest that the writ was sued out for delay only. page 104 u. s. 557 mr. chief justice waite delivered the opinion of the court. the affidavits which have been filed by the plaintiff in error in opposition to these motions are probably sufficient to establish the fact that the value of the matter in dispute exceeds $5,000. the motion to dismiss is therefore denied, but on looking into the record, we are entirely satisfied the writ was taken for delay only. no assignment of errors has been annexed to or returned with the writ, as required by sec. 997 of the revised statutes, and every question presented by the bill of exceptions or suggested upon the argument appears to us so frivolous as to make it improper to keep the case here for any further consideration. there was on the record, as it stood when these motions were made, at least sufficient color of right to a dismissal to justify us in entertaining with it a motion to affirm in accordance with the provisions of rule 6, par. 5. motion to affirm granted.

Full Judgment

Micas v. Williams - 104 U.S. 556 (1881)
U.S. Supreme Court Micas v. Williams, 104 U.S. 556 (1881)

Micas v. Williams

104 U.S. 556

MOTION TO DISMISS WRIT OF ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF

THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

SYLLABUS

Where the record is such as to furnish a sufficient color of right to the dismissal of the writ of error to justify the court in entertaining with a motion to dismiss a motion to affirm under Rule 6, held that although the grounds for dismissal be removed by a further showing, the motion to affirm will be granted when it is manifest that the writ was sued out for delay only.

Page 104 U. S. 557

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

The affidavits which have been filed by the plaintiff in error in opposition to these motions are probably sufficient to establish the fact that the value of the matter in dispute exceeds $5,000. The motion to dismiss is therefore denied, but on looking into the record, we are entirely satisfied the writ was taken for delay only. No assignment of errors has been annexed to or returned with the writ, as required by sec. 997 of the Revised Statutes, and every question presented by the bill of exceptions or suggested upon the argument appears to us so frivolous as to make it improper to keep the case here for any further consideration. There was on the record, as it stood when these motions were made, at least sufficient color of right to a dismissal to justify us in entertaining with it a motion to affirm in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6, par. 5.

Motion to affirm granted.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial