Citation network
Huntington Vs. Attrill
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 12, 1892
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 657 (1892) U.S. Supreme Court Huntington v. AttrillSearch
-
U.S. 657 (1892) Huntington v. AttrillSearch
-
yet did not change the nature of the transaction, but, within the decision of this Court in Wisconsin v. PelicanSearch
-
rendered in another state is a federal question of which this Court has jurisdiction on this writ of error. Green v. VanSearch
-
Crescent City Co. v. Butchers'Search
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
corporal or pecuniary, imposed and enforced by the state for a crime or offense against its laws. United States v. ReisingerSearch
-
Hyde v. CoganSearch
-
the amount, has been held to be remedial as to the loser, though penal as regards the suit by a common informer. Bones v. BoothSearch
-
Brandon v. PateSearch
-
Grace v. McElroySearch
-
Read v. StewartSearch
-
Cole v. GrovesSearch
-
Woodgate v. KnatchbullSearch
-
Read v. ChelmsfordSearch
-
Lake v. SmithSearch
-
Wilkinson v. ColleySearch
-
Reed v. NorthfieldSearch
-
Rafael v. VerelstSearch
-
states of the union, such actions are regarded as local, and can be brought only where the land is situated. Doulson v. MatthewsSearch
-
could not be maintained in Virginia, by whose law it was local, for a trespass to land in New Orleans. Livingston v. JeffersonSearch
-
Holmes v. BarclaySearch
-
to land in a foreign country, all agreed that this question depended on the law of England. Companhia de Mocambique v. BritishSearch
-
Q.B. 358. See also Cragin v. LovellSearch
-
Allin v. ConnecticutSearch
-
Phillips v. EyreSearch
-
Wooden v. WesternSearch
-
Ash v. BaltimoreSearch
-
and actionable there although a like wrong would not be actionable in the state where the suit is brought. Smith v. CondrySearch
-
Dennick v. RailroadSearch
-
Texas & Pacific Railway v. CoxSearch
-
reliance Page 146 U. S. 671 was placed by each party in argument upon the opinion of this Court in Wisconsin v. PelicanSearch
-
to take jurisdiction of a suit to recover a like penalty for a violation of a law of the United States. Martin v. HunterSearch
-
United States v. LathropSearch
-
Delafield v. IllinoisSearch
-
Jackson v. RoseSearch
-
Ely v. PeckSearch
-
Davison v. ChamplinSearch
-
Haney v. SharpSearch
-
State v. PikeSearch
-
Ward v. JenkinsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial