Us Supreme Court Court February 1891 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.
Martin's Administrator Vs. Baltimore and Ohio R. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-05-1891
Martin's Administrator v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. - 151 U.S. 673 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Martin's Administrator v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 151 U.S. 673 (1894) Martin's Administrator v. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company No. 87 Argued November 6, 1893 Decided February 5, 1891 151 U.S. 673 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA Syllabus Under the provision of the Act of March 3, 1887, c. 373, authorizing an action brought in a court of a state between citizens of different states to be removed into the circuit court of the United States "by the defendant or defendants therein, being nonresidents of that state," a defendant corporation must be created by the laws of another state only, in order to entitle it to remove the action, and if it is such a corporation, and has not been also created a corporation by the laws of the state in which an action is brought against it by a citizen thereof, it may remove the action even if it ha...
North Vs. Peters
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
North v. Peters - 138 U.S. 271 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court North v. Peters, 138 U.S. 271 (1891) North v. Peters No. 148 Argued January 13, 1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 271 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF DAKOTA Syllabus L., a merchant in Dakota, intending to defraud his creditors, sold his entire stock of goods, much of which was of a perishable nature, together with the goodwill of the business, to N., who was entirely ignorant of his purpose and who paid an adequate consideration for them. Sundry Page 138 U. S. 272 creditors of L. sued out writs of attachment against him. These were placed in the hands of a sheriff, who seized the goods as the property of L. N. brought this suit against the sheriff to compel him to surrender the property and to restrain him from again levying upon it as the property of L., and a preliminary injunction was issued. The question of the validity of the sale was submitted to a jury, who found in plaintiff's favor. T...
United States Vs. Green
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
United States v. Green - 138 U.S. 293 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Green, 138 U.S. 293 (1891) United States v. Green No. 1343 Submitted January 9, 1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 293 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus The plaintiff was a commander in the navy of the United States, with the following record of entry and promotion: in the volunteer service, acting master's mate, May 7, 1861; acting ensign, November 27, 1862; acting master, August 11, 1864: in the regular service, master, March 12, 1868; lieutenant, December 18, 1868; lieutenant-commander, July 3, 1870; commander, March 6, 1887. He had never received any benefit of longevity pay under that clause in the Act of March 3, 1883, 22 Stat. 473, c. 97, providing that "All officers of the navy shall be credited with the actual time they may have served as officers or enlisted men in the regular or volunteer Army or Navy, or both, and shall receive all the benefits Page 138 U. S. 294 of suc...
Wadsworth Vs. Adams
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
Wadsworth v. Adams - 138 U.S. 380 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Wadsworth v. Adams, 138 U.S. 380 (1891) Wadsworth v. Adams No. 152 Argued and submitted January 20-21,1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 380 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA Syllabus A, the owner of five promissory notes for $100,000 each, being in want of money, empowered B, who knew of his necessities, to sell them at a discount which would net the sum of $380,000, agreeing to give him $10,000 in case of success. B took the notes to New York, and there offered them to C for $380,000. C declined to take them at that price, but offered $360,000 for them. B at first refused to communicate this offer to A, but on being pressed to do so, said to C that as A was in need of money he would send the offer by telegraph, and he did so send it. At a later hour on the same day, B asked C what he would do in case his offer should be refused, to which C replied that he wou...
In Re Cooper, Petitioner
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
In re Cooper, Petitioner - 138 U.S. 404 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court In re Cooper, Petitioner, 138 U.S. 404 (1891) In re Cooper, Petitioner No number Argued January 27-28, 1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 404 ORIGINAL Syllabus This Court has jurisdiction to proceed, in respect to the District Court of the United States for the District of Alaska, by way of prohibition, under Rev.Stat. § 688, and therefore gives leave to the petition for such a writ, and the accompanying suggestion in this case. On the 12th day of January, 1891, Mr. Joseph H. Choate presented to the Court a petition for a writ of prohibition to be directed to the judge of the District Court of the United States in and for the Territory of Alaska, and moved for leave to file the same. This petition was as follows: " To the Honorable, the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States: " "Comes now, Thomas Henry Cooper, a British subject, and gives this Honorable Cou...
Beardsley Vs. Beardsley
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
Beardsley v. Beardsley - 138 U.S. 262 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Beardsley v. Beardsley, 138 U.S. 262 (1891) Beardsley v. Beardsley No. 119 Submitted December 12, 1890 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 262 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS Syllabus The appellant signed and delivered to the appellee a paper in which he said "I hold of the stock of the Washington and Hope Railway Company $33,250 or 1,350 shares, which is sold to Yaul F. Beardsley [the appellee], and which, though standing in my name, belongs to him, subject to a payment of $8,000, with interest at same rate, and from same date as interest on my purchase of Mr. Alderman's stock." Held that this was an executed contract, by which the ownership of the stock passed to the appellee, with a reservation of title, simply as security for the purchase money. On the second question at issue, the Court holds that the contested facts establish a joint interest in th...
Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Co. Vs. Wheeling Bridge Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co. v. Wheeling Bridge Co. - 138 U.S. 287 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co. v. Wheeling Bridge Co., 138 U.S. 287 (1891) Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Company v. Wheeling Bridge Company No. 1425 Submitted December 15, 1890 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 287 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA Syllabus When the highest court of a state holds a judgment of an inferior court of that state to be final, this Court can hardly consider it in any other light in exercising its appellate jurisdiction. A ferry connecting Wheeling with wheeling Island was licensed at an early day in Virginia. Subsequently a general law of that state prohibited Page 138 U. S. 288 the courts of the different counties from licensing a ferry within a half a mile in a direct line from an established ferry. In 1847, the defendant purchased the ferry and its rights. Held: (1) That the general law of Virginia had in it nothing in t...
Upshur Vs. Briscoe
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
Upshur v. Briscoe - 138 U.S. 365 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Upshur v. Briscoe, 138 U.S. 365 (1891) Upshur v. Briscoe No. 146 Submitted January 12, 1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 365 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA Syllabus The cases reviewed on the question of what are debts created by a bankrupt while acting in a fiduciary character, so as not to be discharged, under 33 of the Bankruptcy Act of March 2, 1567, c. 176, 14 Stat. 533. The obligation in the present case held to have been discharged. A debt is not created by a person while acting in a "fiduciary character" merely because it is created under circumstances in which trust or confidence is reposed in the debtor in the popular sense of those terms. In this case it was held that the widow of the bankrupt, who was alleged to be a fraudulent grantee, was entitled to the benefit of his discharge, she having pleaded it. On the 25th of January, 1857, James Andrews, of the Parish of Tensas, ...
Beaupre Vs. Noyes
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
Beaupre v. Noyes - 138 U.S. 397 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Beaupre v. Noyes, 138 U.S. 397 (1891) Beaupre v. Noyes No. 160 Argued and submitted January 23, 1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 397 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Syllabus Although a case from the highest court of a state may involve a federal question, yet if that court proceeds upon another and distinct ground, not involving a federal question, and sufficient in itself to maintain the final judgment without reference to the federal question involved, its judgment will be affirmed here. This Court is without authority to review an order denying a motion for a new trial. The case, as stated by the court, was as follows: This action was brought in the District Court of Ramsey County, Minnesota, by the defendants in error, partners as Noyes Bros. & Cutler, against the plaintiffs in error, partners as Beaupre, Keogh & Co., each firm doing business in the City of St. Paul. The com...
Kauffman Vs. Wootters
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Feb-02-1891
Kauffman v. Wootters - 138 U.S. 285 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Kauffman v. Wootters, 138 U.S. 285 (1891) Kauffman v. Wootters No. 1389 Submitted January 5, 1891 Decided February 2, 1891 138 U.S. 285 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS Syllabus State legislation simply forbidding the defendant to come into court and challenge the validity of service upon him in a personal action without surrendering himself to the jurisdiction of the court, but which does not attempt to restrain him from fully protecting his person, his property, and his rights against any attempt to enforce a judgment rendered without due process of law, is not in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. York v. Texas, 137 U. S. 15 , affirmed and applied. This was a motion to dismiss or affirm. The case is stated in the opinion. Page 138 U. S. 286 MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the Court. This case is before us upon a motion t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »