Court : US Supreme Court
Menotti v. Dillon - 167 U.S. 703 (1897) U.S. Supreme Court Menotti v. Dillon, 167 U.S. 703 (1897) Menotti v. Dillon No. 309 Submitted April 28, 1897 Decided May 24, 1897 167 U.S. 703 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus The land in controversy, being 240 acres situated in California, was settled upon and improved in good faith by H. in 1858, with the intention of taking at the proper time, the necessary steps to acquire the title thereto from the United States by procuring its location in part satisfaction of the grant made by the United States to the State of California of 500,900 acres of land, and then of purchasing the land in question from the state. In June, 1864, H., in proper form, made application to the state, under the act of California approved April 27, 1863, for the sale of certain lands, to locate this land as a "lieu school land location," and to purchase it from the state. This application and offer to purchase were approved by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1898)ILR25Cal160
Maclean, C.J.1. On the 17th December 1892, the Vice-Chairman of the Hooghly and Chinsurah Municipality wrote and sent to the plaintiff in this suit the following notice:Sir,---By a resolution of the Commissioners at a general meeting held on the 9th September last your prayer to allow the sajah to be made was disallowed. I therefore request that you will be good enough to remove the iron brackets put up against your house within eight days from the date of receipt of this letter, otherwise necessary steps should he taken for their removal.2. I understand and I have specially asked the question that no other notice was sent by the defendants to the plaintiff.3. The first question which we have to decide is whether, having regard to the terms of Section 204 of Bengal Act III of 1884, the Municipality were justified, under the circumstances of this case, in giving a notice, which admittedly the above document purported to be, under that Section. The Municipality admit that they considered...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1897)ILR20Mad407
Benson, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Letters Patent against an order of Mr. Justice Shephard, dismissing an appeal against an order of the District Judge of South Canara, in Appeal Suit No. 279 of 1893, remanding a suit to the Court of First Instance under Section 562, Code of Civil Procedure, for disposal on the merits.2. A preliminary objection is raised that no appeal lies inasmuch as the order of Mr. Justice Shephard was passed in an appeal under Section 588, Code of Civil Procedure, and the last paragraph of that Section provides that 'orders passed in appeals under this Section shall be final' In reply it is contended that the Section does not apply to a case like the present where a Judge of the High Court sitting alone makes the order, and that, by virtue of Section 15 of the Letters Patent, an appeal does lie notwithstanding the provisions in Section 588. In a word, the question is whether the right of appeal given by Section 15 of the Letters Patent against ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Bram v. United States - 168 U.S. 532 (1897) U.S. Supreme Court Bram v. United States, 168 U.S. 532 (1897) Bram v. United States No. 340 Argued October 18, 19, 1897 Decided December 13, 1897 168 U.S. 532 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus This was an indictment for murder alleged to have been committed on an American vessel on the high seas. After the crime was discovered, Brown, a sailor, was put in irons and the vessel was headed for Halifax. Before it reached there, Brown charged Bram with the commission of the crime, saying that he had seen him do it. Bram was then also put in irons. On the arrival at Halifax, Power, a policeman and detective in the government service at that place, had a conversation with Bram. Bram was indicted at Boston for the commission of the crime, and, on his trial, Power was offered as a witness for the Government. He testified that he made an examination of Bram, in his own office in the c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1898)ILR25Cal371
Jenkins, J.1. On the 14th November 1893 the defendant executed, in favour of Luckhinarain Singh, the original plaintiff in the suit, a mortgage of certain immoveable properties, which had devolved on the defendant under the will of his grandfather, and on the 20th February 1895 this suit was instituted, whereby it is prayed:(a) That the defendant may be decreed by this Honourable Court to pay to the plaintiff the sum of Rs. 5,000, together with the interest due thereon, and the costs of this suit on some day to be fixed by this Honourable Court, and that in default thereof the right to redeem the said mortgaged premises may be foreclosed.(b) That the said premises may be sold, and the sale proceeds applied in and towards the repayment of the said sum of Rs. 5,000, and the interest thereon, and the costs of this suit.(c) That if the sale proceeds be not sufficient for the payment in full of the said amounts, the said defendant be decreed and ordered to pay to the plaintiff the amount of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Holden v. Hardy - 169 U.S. 366 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366 (1898) Holden v. Hardy No. 261, 264 Argued October 21, 1897 Decided February 28, 1898 169 U.S. 366 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH Syllabus The provisions in the act of March 30, 1896, c. 72, of Utah, providing that "The period of employment of workingmen in all underground mines or workings shall be eight hours per day, except in cases of emergency where life or property is in imminent danger;" that "The period of employment of workingmen in smelters and all other institutions for the reduction or refining of ores or metals shall be eight hours per day, except in cases of emergency where life or property is in imminent danger;" and that "Any person, body corporate, agent, manager or employer who shall violate any of the provisions of sections one and two of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor," are a valid exercise of the police power of the State, and do not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Backus v. Fort Street Union Depot Co. - 169 U.S. 557 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court Backus v. Fort Street Union Depot Co., 169 U.S. 557 (1898) Backus v. Fort Street Union Depot Company No. 55 Argued January 17-18, 1898 Decided March 7, 1898 169 U.S. 557 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN Syllabus As the respondents, both at the trial in the circuit court of the state and in the subsequent proceedings on the certiorari in the supreme court of the state, specifically set up and claimed rights under the federal Constitution which were denied, the jurisdiction of this Court is not open to doubt. While this Court may examine proceedings had in a state court, under state authority, for the appropriation of private property to public purposes so far as to inquire whether that court prescribed any rule of law in disregard of the owner's right to just compensation, it may not inquire into matters which do not necessarily involve, in any substantial sense, the federal ri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Wong Kim Ark - 169 U.S. 649 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) United States v. Wong Kim Ark No. 18 Argued March 5, 8, 1897 Decided March 28, 1898 169 U.S. 649 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, "All person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." This was a writ of habeas corp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
New York Indians v. United States - 170 U.S. 1 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court New York Indians v. United States, 170 U.S. 1 (1898) New York Indians v. United States No. 106 Argued March 2-3, 1898 Decided April 11, 1898 170 U.S. 1 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus The provision in the Treaty of June 15, 1838, with the New York Indians, that the United States will set apart as a permanent home for them the tract therein described in what afterwards became the State of Kansas, was intended to invest a present legal title thereto in the Indians, which title has not been forfeited and has not been reinvested in the United States, and the Indians are not estopped from claiming the benefit of such reservation. It appears by the records of the proceedings of the Senate that several amendments were there made to said treaty, including a new article; that the ratification was made subject to a proviso, the text of which is stated in the opinion of the Court, and that in the officia...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Schollenberger v. Pennsylvania - 171 U.S. 1 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court Schollenberger v. Pennsylvania, 171 U.S. 1 (1898) Schollenberger v. Pennsylvania Nos. 86-88 Argued March 23-24, 1898 Decided May 28, 1898 171 U.S. 1 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Syllabus Oleomargarine has, for nearly a quarter of a century, been recognized in Europe and in the United States as an article of food and commerce, and was recognized as such by Congress in the Act of August 2, 1886, c. 840, and, being thus a lawful article of commerce, it cannot be wholly excluded from importation into a state from another state where it was manufactured, although the state into which it was imported may so regulate the introduction as to insure purity without having the power to totally exclude it. A sale of a ten-pound package of oleomargarine, manufactured, packed, marked, imported and sold under the circumstances set forth in detail in the special verdict in this case, was a vali...
Tag this Judgment!