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.

Midway Company Vs. Eaton

Midway Company vs Eaton

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jan-13-1902
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/89352

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
183 U.S. 619
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Midway Company

Respondent

Eaton

Excerpt

midway company v. eaton - 183 u.s. 619 (1902) u.s. supreme court midway company v. eaton, 183 u.s. 619 (1902) midway company v. eaton no. 81 argued december 4-5, 1901 decided january 13, 1902 183 u.s. 619 error to the supreme court of the state of minnesota syllabus this case is affirmed on the authority of midway company v. eaton, ante, 183 u. s. 602 . the case is stated in the opinion of the court. page 183 u. s. 620 mr. justice mc kenna delivered the opinion of the court. this action was brought by the germania iron company against the defendants in error in the district court of st. louis county, state of minnesota, to determine adverse claims to the s.e. 1/4 of the n.w. 1/4 of section 30, t. 63 n., of range 11 w., of the fourth principal meridian, according to the government survey in said st. louis county. pending the action, the land was conveyed to the midway company, and the latter company was substituted as plaintiff for the germania company. plaintiff in error claims title under a patent issued by the united states to emil hartman, dated october 21, 1895, by whom the land was conveyed to the germania company, and by the latter to the plaintiff in error. the defendants claim title under a certain location of sioux half-breed scrip issued under the act of july 17, 1854. 10 stat. 304, c. 83. the trial court rendered judgment for defendants, which was affirmed by the supreme court of the state, and this writ of error was then allowed by the chief justice of that court. the facts of this case are the same, and are presented upon exactly the same record, the same assignments of error and contentions as in midway co. v. eaton, ante, 183 u. s. 261 . on the authority of that case, the judgment of the supreme court is affirmed.

Full Judgment

Midway Company v. Eaton - 183 U.S. 619 (1902)
U.S. Supreme Court Midway Company v. Eaton, 183 U.S. 619 (1902)

Midway Company v. Eaton

No. 81

Argued December 4-5, 1901

Decided January 13, 1902

183 U.S. 619

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

SYLLABUS

This case is affirmed on the authority of Midway Company v. Eaton, ante, 183 U. S. 602 .

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Page 183 U. S. 620

MR. JUSTICE Mc KENNA delivered the opinion of the Court.

This action was brought by the Germania Iron Company against the defendants in error in the District Court of St. Louis County, State of Minnesota, to determine adverse claims to the S.E. 1/4 of the N.W. 1/4 of section 30, T. 63 N., of range 11 W., of the fourth principal meridian, according to the government survey in said St. Louis County.

Pending the action, the land was conveyed to the Midway Company, and the latter company was substituted as plaintiff for the Germania Company.

Plaintiff in error claims title under a patent issued by the United States to Emil Hartman, dated October 21, 1895, by whom the land was conveyed to the Germania Company, and by the latter to the plaintiff in error.

The defendants claim title under a certain location of Sioux half-breed scrip issued under the Act of July 17, 1854. 10 Stat. 304, c. 83.

The trial court rendered judgment for defendants, which was affirmed by the supreme court of the state, and this writ of error was then allowed by the chief justice of that court.

The facts of this case are the same, and are presented upon exactly the same record, the same assignments of error and contentions as in Midway Co. v. Eaton, ante, 183 U. S. 261 . On the authority of that case, the judgment of the Supreme Court is

Affirmed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial