Us Supreme Court Court February 1890 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
United States Vs. Mosby
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
United States v. Mosby - 133 U.S. 273 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Mosby, 133 U.S. 273 (1890) United States v. Mosby Nos. 1112, 1320 Argued January 17, 1890 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 273 APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus The question considered as to what are "official services" performed by consuls under the consular regulations of 1874 and 1881, prescribed by the President by virtue of the provisions of § 1745 of the Revised Statutes. Fees collected by a consul for the examination of Chinese emigrants going to the United States on foreign vessels, and fees for certificates of shipment of merchandise in transit through the United States to other countries, and fees for recording instruments which are not official documents recorded in the record books required to be kept by the consul, but relate to private transactions for individuals not requiring the use of the consul's title or seal of office, and fees for cattle disease certificates,...
Burt Vs. Evory
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Burt v. Evory - 133 U.S. 349 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Burt v. Evory, 133 U.S. 349 (1890) Burt v. Evory No. 104 Argued December 10, 1889 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 349 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus The claim in letters patent No. 59,375, granted to Alexander F. Evory and Alonzo Heston, November 6, 1866, for an "improvement in boots and shoes" was for a manufactured article, and not for the mode of producing it, and, as it was merely a carrying forward of the original idea of the earlier patents on the same subject -- simply a change in form and arrangement of the constituent parts of the shoe, or an improvement in degree only -- it was not a patentable invention. Not every improvement in an article is patentable, but the improvement must be the product of an original conception, and if it is a mere carrying forward or more extended application of an original idea, an improvement in degree only, it is no...
Street Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Street v. United States - 133 U.S. 299 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Street v. United States, 133 U.S. 299 (1890) Street v. United States No. 1123 Submitted January 10, 1890 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 299 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus It was the purpose of Congress by the 12th and 13th sections of the Army Appropriation Act of July 15, 1870, 16 Stat. 318, 319, to reduce the number of officers in the army, and to that end 11 authorized the President to eliminate from it officers who were unfit for the discharge of their duties by reason of a cause which had no meritorious claim upon the consideration of the government, while 12 made a general grant of power to the President to make the reduction by selecting the best, and mustering out the residue, and the President, being empowered to proceed under either grant, could commence proceedings under 11, and abandon them, and then proceed under 12. The 12th section of the Army Appropriation Act of July 15, 1870,...
Geofroy Vs. Riggs
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Geofroy v. Riggs - 133 U.S. 258 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 (1890) Geofroy v. Riggs No. 1431 Submitted December 23, 1889 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 258 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus A citizen of France can take land in the District of Columbia by descent from a citizen of the United States. The treaty power of the United States extends to the protection to be afforded to citizens of a foreign country owning property in this country and to the manner in which that property may be transferred, devised, or inherited. The District of Columbia, as a political community, is one of "the states of the union," within the meaning of that term as used in Article 7 of the Consular Convention of February 23, 1853, with France. Article 7 of the Convention with France of September 30, 1800, construed. Article 7 of the Consular Convention with France of February 23, 1853, construed. In equity. The bill alleged th...
Adams Vs. Crittenden
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Adams v. Crittenden - 133 U.S. 296 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Adams v. Crittenden, 133 U.S. 296 (1890) Adams v. Crittenden No. 952 Submitted January 13, 1890 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 296 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA Syllabus A person in failing circumstances conveyed away his equity of redemption in mortgaged real estate, and then became bankrupt. His assignee in bankruptcy recovered the tract from the grantee in an action brought for that purpose to which the mortgagee was not made party, and then conveyed it by deed to a purchaser. The mortgagee sued in the state court to foreclose his mortgage, making the bankrupt, his assignee, and the grantee of the assignee, parties; the land was sold under a decree of foreclosure, and the purchaser under it received a deed and was put into possession. Thereupon the grantee of the assignee in bankruptcy brought ejectment against him to recover possession. Held that the ...
Davis Vs. Beason
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Davis v. Beason - 133 U.S. 333 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890) Davis v. Beason No. 1261 Argued December 9-10, 1889 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 333 APPEAL FROM THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF IDAHO Syllabus The provision in 501, Rev.Stats.Idaho, that "No person who is a bigamist or polygamist, or who teaches, advises, counsels or encourages any person or persona to become bigamists or polygamists or to commit any other crime defined by law, or to enter into what is known as plural or celestial marriage, or who is a member of any order, organization, or association which teaches, advises, counsels or encourages its members or devotees or any other persons to commit the crime of bigamy or polygamy, or any other crime defined by law, either as a rite or ceremony of such order, organization or association or otherwise, is permitted to vote at any election, or to hold any position or office of honor, trust or profit wit...
Beals Vs. Illinois, Missouri and Texas R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Beals v. Illinois, Missouri & Texas R. Co. - 133 U.S. 290 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Beals v. Illinois, Missouri & Texas R. Co., 133 U.S. 290 (1890) Beals v. Illinois, Missouri and Texas Railroad Company No. 111 Argued January 16-17, 1890 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 290 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI Syllabus A decree in equity canceling bonds of one railroad corporation and a mortgage by a second railroad corporation of its property to secure their payment, upon a bill filed by the latter against the former and the trustee under the mortgage, binds all the bondholders, unless obtained by fraud. And a bill afterwards filed by bondholders not personally made parties to that suit against those two corporations and a third railroad corporation alleged to claim a right in the property, by purchase or otherwise, prior to the lien of the bondholders, charging fraud and collusion in obtaining that decree, cannot be main...
irwIn Vs. San Francisco Savings Union
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Irwin v. San Francisco Savings Union - 136 U.S. 578 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Irwin v. San Francisco Savings Union, 136 U.S. 578 (1890) Irwin v. San Francisco Savings Union No. 181 Submitted January 23, 1890 Decided February 3, 1890 136 U.S. 578 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus Wright v. Roseberry, 121 U. S. 488 , affirmed and applied to this case. The United States, being the real party interested as plaintiffs in error, by their counsel filed the following statement as a brief for the plaintiff in error: "This is an action of ejectment, brought in the Superior Court of Solano County, California, and afterwards removed into the United States Circuit Court, to recover a large body of swamp and overflowed lands contiguous to the mainland of Mare Island, upon which island the United States have a navy yard, and have erected extensive buildings, etc." "The plaintiff in error, the defendant below, was the offi...
Smith Vs. Lyon
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Smith v. Lyon - 133 U.S. 315 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Smith v. Lyon, 133 U.S. 315 (1890) Smith v. Lyon No. 1164 Submitted January 6, 1890 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 315 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI Syllabus Under the Act of March 3, 1887, 24 Stat. 552, c. 373, as amended by the Act of August 13, 1888, 25 Stat. 433, c. 552, a circuit court of the United States has not jurisdiction on the ground of diverse citizenship if there are two plaintiffs to the action who are citizens of and residents in different states and the defendant is a citizen of and resident in a third state and the action is brought in the state in which one of the plaintiffs resides. This action was dismissed by the court below for want of jurisdiction, to which judgment the plaintiffs below sued out this writ of error. The case is stated in the opinion. MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the Court. This is a writ of error to the Ci...
CorbIn Vs. Gould
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-03-1890
Corbin v. Gould - 133 U.S. 308 (1890) U.S. Supreme Court Corbin v. Gould, 133 U.S. 308 (1890) Corbin v. Gould No. 131 Argued November 22, 1889 Decided February 3, 1890 133 U.S. 308 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN Syllabus The trademark for tea (No. 9952) registered in the Patent Office by Ingraham, Corbin & May December 27, 1881, was for the combination of the figure of a diamond and the words "The Tycoon Tea" enclosed in it, and its registration conferred no exclusive right to the use of the word "Tycoon" considered by itself. This is a suit in equity brought in the court below by Calvin R. Corbin and Horatio N. May, co-partners, as Corbin, May & Co., doing business in Chicago, against Walter J. Gould, Edward Telfer, David D. Cady, and L. F. Thompson, co-partners as W. J. Gould & Co., doing business in Detroit, for the alleged infringement of a trademark. The bill, filed on the 24th of September, 1885, alleged subst...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »