Citation network
Kurtz Vs. Moffitt
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 23, 1885
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
-
U.S. 487 (1885) U.S. Supreme Court Kurtz v. MoffittSearch
-
U.S. 487 (1885) Kurtz v. MoffittSearch
-
Stat. 261. In Lee v. LeeSearch
-
been the plaintiff in error, might have been ascertained by affidavits. 8 Pet. 33 U. S. 48 . In Barry v. MerceinSearch
-
How. 46 U. S. 120 -121. In Pratt v. FitzhughSearch
-
section of the Judiciary Act had always been held to mean a property value, and he distinguished the case of Holmes v. JennisonSearch
-
from a state court under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, in which case no value was required. In De Kraff v. BarneySearch
-
for the District of Columbia awarding the custody of a child to the father, as against the divorced mother, and Lee v. LeeSearch
-
the appeal for want of jurisdiction, Chief Justice Taney saying that the case was not distinguishable from Barry v. MerceinSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
clearly implies that writs of habeas corpus would not be included if not specially mentioned. See also Potts v. ChumaseroSearch
-
Wright v. CourtSearch
-
King v. BealSearch
-
The King v. DaleSearch
-
Tyler v. PomeroySearch
-
latter under the articles of war to receive and hold all prisoners so delivered to him by a military officer. Wolton v. GavinSearch
-
Wolton v. FreeseSearch
-
proceedings, within the limits of their jurisdiction, cannot be controlled or revised by the civil courts. Dynes v. HooverSearch
-
court-martial, as was clearly shown by Mr. Justice Strong, when a judge of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, in Huber v. ReilySearch
-
Penn.St. 112, and has been uniformly held by the civil courts as well as by the military authorities. State v. SymondsSearch
-
Severance Page 115 U. S. 502 v. HealeySearch
-
Goetcheus v. MatthewsonSearch
-
in chief, and are binding upon all within the sphere of his legal and constitutional authority. United States v. EliasonSearch
-
held by the courts of the several states to be in force in cases of felony punishable by the civil tribunals. Wakely v. HartSearch
-
Holley v. MixSearch
-
Rohan v. SawinSearch
-
Brockway v. CrawfordSearch
-
Reuck v. McGregorSearch
-
Burns v. ErbenSearch
-
State v. HolmesSearch
-
extended to the case of an offender against the military law punishable exclusively by court-martial. In Hutchings v. VanSearch
-
was not even suggested that the arrest could be supported without any evidence of his military authority. And in Trask v. PayneSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Kurtz v. MoffittSearch
-
In Lee v. LeeSearch
-
In Barry v. MerceinSearch
-
In Pratt v. FitzhughSearch
-
of Holmes v. JennisonSearch
-
In De Kraff v. BarneySearch
-
and Lee v. LeeSearch
-
The King v. DaleSearch
-
Wolton v. GavinSearch
-
Huber v. ReilySearch
-
State v. SymondsSearch
-
Wakely v. HartSearch
-
In Hutchings v. VanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial