Hartranft Vs. Winters

Hartranft vs Winters

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-02-1887

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/85627

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/85627
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: May-02-1887
Case Number: 121 U.S. 616
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hartranft

Respondent

Winters

Excerpt

hartranft v. winters - 121 u.s. 616 (1887) u.s. supreme court hartranft v. winters, 121 u.s. 616 (1887) hartranft v. winters argued april 20-21, 1887 decided may 2, 1887 121 u.s. 616 error to the circuit court of the united states for the eastern district of pennsylvania syllabus this case is affirmed on the authority of hartranft v. wiegmann, ante, 121 u. s. 609 . this was an action to recover back duties alleged to have been illegally exacted. judgment for plaintiff. defendant sued out this writ of error. mr. justice blatchford delivered the opinion of the court. this is an action by anton winters, brought in a state court of pennsylvania and removed into the circuit court of the united states for the eastern district of pennsylvania, against the collector of customs for the district of philadelphia. the proceedings in it, and the questions arising, are in all respects the same as those in the case of hartranft v. wiegmann, just decided, the only difference being that in this case there were no shells called "green snails" or "mottoes" or "turk's caps" or "magpies" or "trocus," and that there were page 121 u. s. 617 shells called "rose murex," "motto cowries," "banded snails," "japan ears," "turbo shells," "red ears," and "pearl snails." the same conclusion is arrived at as in the wiegmann case, and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Full Judgment

Hartranft v. Winters - 121 U.S. 616 (1887)
U.S. Supreme Court Hartranft v. Winters, 121 U.S. 616 (1887)

Hartranft v. Winters

Argued April 20-21, 1887

Decided May 2, 1887

121 U.S. 616

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

SYLLABUS

This case is affirmed on the authority of Hartranft v. Wiegmann, ante, 121 U. S. 609 .

This was an action to recover back duties alleged to have been illegally exacted. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant sued out this writ of error.

MR. JUSTICE BLATCHFORD delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an action by Anton Winters, brought in a state court of Pennsylvania and removed into the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, against the Collector of Customs for the District of Philadelphia. The proceedings in it, and the questions arising, are in all respects the same as those in the case of Hartranft v. Wiegmann, just decided, the only difference being that in this case there were no shells called "green snails" or "mottoes" or "Turk's caps" or "magpies" or "trocus," and that there were

Page 121 U. S. 617

shells called "rose murex," "motto cowries," "banded snails," "Japan ears," "turbo shells," "red ears," and "pearl snails."

The same conclusion is arrived at as in the Wiegmann case, and the judgment of the circuit court is

Affirmed.

Same Parties Hartranft vs Winters Same Subject Education

Education In all respects circuit court supreme court writ of error state court In all