Nash Vs. Harshman

Nash vs Harshman

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-01-1893

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/87287

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/87287
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: May-01-1893
Case Number: 149 U.S. 263
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nash

Respondent

Harshman

Excerpt

.....decided may 1, 1893 149 u.s. 263 appeal from the circuit court of the united states for the northern district of ohio syllabus this case is dismissed upon the authority of hohorst v. hamburg-american packet co., 148 u. s. 262 . this action was commenced in the court of common pleas of logan county, ohio, to foreclose a mortgage made by nash to harshman of real estate then owned by him, and conveyed by him to one dupee after the execution of the mortgage. nash and dupee were both made defendants. after issue joined, the cause was removed to the circuit court of the united states on the defendants' motion on the ground of local prejudice. trial was had there which resulted in a decree, december 4, 1890, against nash for the payment of the debt, and against dupee for the sale of the land on failure of nash to make the payment within ten days from the decree. on the 11th of december, nash took an appeal to this court, which was allowed, and a receiver was appointed to take possession of the estate and hold and manage it pending the appeal. the appellee moved to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment, assigning the following reasons therefor: page 149 u. s. 264 "1. no proper bond for appealing said cause to this court has been given, and none was required by said circuit court to be given, but in allowing this appeal, said court assumed to excuse and dispense with the bond required by law, whereby the allowance of appeal is rendered invalid and this court acquires no jurisdiction thereby." "2. this appeal is not taken and prosecuted by the party against whom the decree of the court below was rendered." "3. it is apparent upon an inspection of the record that said appeal is frivolous and utterly groundless, and was taken for the purpose of delay merely." the chief justice: the appeal is dismissed. hohorst v. hamburg-american packet co., 148 u. s. 262 .

Full Judgment

Nash v. Harshman - 149 U.S. 263 (1893)
U.S. Supreme Court Nash v. Harshman, 149 U.S. 263 (1893)

Nash v. Harshman

No. 957

Submitted April 17, 1893

Decided May 1, 1893

149 U.S. 263

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

SYLLABUS

This case is dismissed upon the authority of Hohorst v. Hamburg-American Packet Co., 148 U. S. 262 .

This action was commenced in the Court of Common Pleas of Logan County, Ohio, to foreclose a mortgage made by Nash to Harshman of real estate then owned by him, and conveyed by him to one Dupee after the execution of the mortgage. Nash and Dupee were both made defendants. After issue joined, the cause was removed to the circuit court of the United States on the defendants' motion on the ground of local prejudice. Trial was had there which resulted in a decree, December 4, 1890, against Nash for the payment of the debt, and against Dupee for the sale of the land on failure of Nash to make the payment within ten days from the decree. On the 11th of December, Nash took an appeal to this Court, which was allowed, and a receiver was appointed to take possession of the estate and hold and manage it pending the appeal. The appellee moved to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment, assigning the following reasons therefor:

Page 149 U. S. 264

"1. No proper bond for appealing said cause to this court has been given, and none was required by said circuit court to be given, but in allowing this appeal, said court assumed to excuse and dispense with the bond required by law, whereby the allowance of appeal is rendered invalid and this court acquires no jurisdiction thereby."

"2. This appeal is not taken and prosecuted by the party against whom the decree of the court below was rendered."

"3. It is apparent upon an inspection of the record that said appeal is frivolous and utterly groundless, and was taken for the purpose of delay merely."

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The appeal is dismissed. Hohorst v. HAMBURG-AMERICAN Packet Co., 148 U. S. 262 .

Same Parties Nash vs Harshman Same Subject Education