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.

Birdseye Vs. Schaeffer

Birdseye vs Schaeffer

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Apr-27-1891
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/86753

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
140 U.S. 117
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

Birdseye

Respondent

Schaeffer

Excerpt

birdseye v. schaeffer - 140 u.s. 117 (1891) u.s. supreme court birdseye v. schaeffer, 140 u.s. 117 (1891) birdseye v. schaeffer no. 920 submitted april 20, 1891 decided april 27, 1891 140 u.s. 117 error to the circuit court of the united states for the western district of texas syllabus it is again decided that an order remanding a cause from a circuit court of the united states to the state court from which it was removed is not a final judgment or decree which this court has jurisdiction to review. this cause was removed to the circuit court of the united states for the western district of texas prior to the passage of the act of march 3, 1887, providing that no appeal or writ of error from the decision of the circuit court remanding a cause to a state court from which it had been removed, should be allowed. the order remanding the cause to the state court page 140 u. s. 118 from which it had been removed was made subsequent to that act, but prior to the act of february 25, 1889; the writ of error was allowed on the 7th of june, a.d. 1889, subsequent to the act of february 25, 1889. a motion was made to dismiss the writ on the grounds: (1) that there was no jurisdiction to issue the same and no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the record filed herein; (2) because the judgment of the circuit court complained of, remanding the cause to the district court of nueces county, texas, from which it had been removed for trial, was not a final judgment and cannot be reviewed by this court. per curiam. the writ of error is dismissed upon the authority of gurnee v. county of patrick, 137 u. s. 141 ; danville railroad co. v. thouron, 134 u. s. 45 . dismissed.

Full Judgment

Birdseye v. Schaeffer - 140 U.S. 117 (1891)
U.S. Supreme Court Birdseye v. Schaeffer, 140 U.S. 117 (1891)

Birdseye v. Schaeffer

No. 920

Submitted April 20, 1891

Decided April 27, 1891

140 U.S. 117

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SYLLABUS

It is again decided that an order remanding a cause from a circuit court of the United States to the state court from which it was removed is not a final judgment or decree which this Court has jurisdiction to review.

This cause was removed to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Texas prior to the passage of the Act of March 3, 1887, providing that no appeal or writ of error from the decision of the Circuit Court remanding a cause to a state court from which it had been removed, should be allowed.

The order remanding the cause to the state court

Page 140 U. S. 118

from which it had been removed was made subsequent to that act, but prior to the Act of February 25, 1889; the writ of error was allowed on the 7th of June, A.D. 1889, subsequent to the act of February 25, 1889.

A motion was made to dismiss the writ on the grounds: (1) that there was no jurisdiction to issue the same and no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the record filed herein; (2) Because the judgment of the Circuit Court complained of, remanding the cause to the district court of Nueces County, Texas, from which it had been removed for trial, was not a final judgment and cannot be reviewed by this Court.

PER CURIAM. The writ of error is dismissed upon the authority of Gurnee v. County of Patrick, 137 U. S. 141 ; Danville Railroad Co. v. Thouron, 134 U. S. 45 .

Dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial