Court : US Supreme Court
Steigleider v. McQuesten - 198 U.S. 141 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Steigleider v. McQuesten, 198 U.S. 141 (1905) Steigleider v. McQuesten No. 227 Submitted April 14, 1905 Decided April 24, 1905 198 U.S. 141 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Syllabus An averment in the bill of the diverse citizenship of the parties is sufficient to make a prima facie case of jurisdiction so far as it depends on citizenship. While, under the act of 1789, an issue as to the fact of citizenship can only be made by plea of abatement, when the pleadings properly aver citizenship, it is the duty of the court, under the Act of March 3, 1875, which is still in force, to dismiss the suit at any time when its want of jurisdiction appears. A motion to dismiss the cause based upon proofs taken by the master is an appropriate mode in which to raise the question of jurisdiction. Residence and citizenship are wholly different things within the meaning of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Bonin v. Gulf Co. - 198 U.S. 115 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Bonin v. Gulf Co., 198 U.S. 115 (1905) Bonin v. Gulf Company No. 50 Argued March 16, 1905 Decided April 24, 1905 198 U.S. 115 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In an action of ejectment, plaintiff pitched his claim solely on a patent from the United States; defendant removed the action to the circuit court on the ground of diverse citizenship and obtained a verdict and judgment on the plea of prescription after nonsuit on plea of res judicata; the judgment was affirmed by the circuit court of appeals. Held that the judgment was final, and the writ of error must be dismissed. The jurisdiction of the circuit court rested solely on diverse citizenship, the assertion of title under patent from the United States presented no question Page 198 U. S. 116 in itself conferring jurisdiction, and plaintiff's petition did not assert, in legal and logical form, if at all, the existence of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Howe Scale Co. v. Wyckoff, Seamans & Benedict - 198 U.S. 118 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Howe Scale Co. v. Wyckoff, Seamans & Benedict, 198 U.S. 118 (1905) Howe Scale Company v. Wyckoff, Seamans & Benedict No. 130 Argued January 16-17, 1905 Decided April 24, 1905 198 U.S. 118 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus In an action to restrain the use of a personal name in trade, where it appears that defendant has the right to use the name and has not done anything to promote confusion in the mind of the public except to use it, complainant's case must stand or fall on the possession of the exclusive right to the use of the name. A personal name -- an ordinary family surname such as Remington -- cannot be exclusively appropriated by any one as against others having a right to use it; it is manifestly incapable of exclusive appropriation as a valid trademark, and its registration as such can not, in itself, give it validity. Every man has a ri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Humphrey v. Tatman - 198 U.S. 91 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Humphrey v. Tatman, 198 U.S. 91 (1905) Humphrey v. Tatman No. 169 Argued March 7, 1905 Decided April 17, 1905 198 U.S. 91 ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus Whether the taking possession of after-acquired property within four months of the filing of the petition in bankruptcy, under a mortgage made in good faith prior to that period, is good or is void as against the trustee in bankruptcy depends upon whether it is good or void according to the law of the state. Thompson v. Fairbanks, 196 U. S. 516 . Held that such a taking is under the circumstances of this case good according to the law of Massachusetts as construed by its Supreme Judicial Court. The facts are stated in the opinion. Page 198 U. S. 92 MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an action brought by a trustee in bankruptcy, the defendant in error, to recover an alleged preference. The case ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Pabst Brewing Co. v. Crenshaw - 198 U.S. 17 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Pabst Brewing Co. v. Crenshaw, 198 U.S. 17 (1905) Pabst Brewing Company v. Crenshaw No. 85 Argued December 8, 1904 Decided April 17, 1905 198 U.S. 17 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI Syllabus The malt liquor inspection law of Missouri provides for the inspection of malt liquors manufactured within the state and also for those manufactured without and held for sale and consumption within the state. The supreme court of the state sustained the law deciding, among other things, that the act does not affect liquors shipped into the state and held there for reshipment without the state, that it does not discriminate in favor of beer manufactured in the state, and that it is not a revenue, but an inspection law. The constitutionality of the law was attacked Page 198 U. S. 18 by a manufacturer of malt liquors without the state as an interference with inter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Benson v. Henkel - 198 U.S. 1 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Benson v. Henkel, 198 U.S. 1 (1905) Benson v. Henkel No. 308 Argued February 20-21, 1905 Decided April 17, 1905 198 U.S. 1 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus In proceedings before an extradition commissioner, if the indictment produced as evidence of probable cause in proceedings for removal is framed in the language of the statute, with ordinary averments of time and place, and sets out the substance of the offense in language sufficient to apprise the accused of the nature of the charge against him, it is sufficient to justify removal even though it may be open to motion to quash or in arrest of judgment in the court in which it was originally found. Whether 5451, Rev.Stat., punishing bribery of officers of the United States, applies to bribery for acts to be committed in the future, in case a certain contingency which may never occur does occur, is a m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Remington v. Central Pacific R. Co. - 198 U.S. 95 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Remington v. Central Pacific R. Co., 198 U.S. 95 (1905) Remington v. Central Pacific Railroad Company No. 460 Submitted March 6, 1905 Decided April 17, 1905 198 U.S. 95 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus This Court has jurisdiction of a writ of error, upon a judgment dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction, when it appears in due form that the ground of the judgment was want of service on defendant and that the plaintiff denied the validity of the removal of the case from a state court. If a petition to remove is filed as soon as it appears in the case that the amount in controversy is sufficient to warrant removal, it is filed in season even if the time for answer has expired under the New York practice, notwithstanding failure to serve a complaint, as to which quaere. Page 198 U. S. 96 Following up a motion to stay in the state c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Covington v. First National Bank - 198 U.S. 100 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Covington v. First National Bank, 198 U.S. 100 (1905) Covington v. First National Bank of Covington Nos. 113-114 Argued January 5, 1905 Decided April 17, 1905 198 U.S. 100 APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY Syllabus A federal court is not required to give a judgment in a state court any greater weight than is awarded to it in the courts of the state in which it was rendered. As it is the settled rule in Kentucky that an adjudication in a suit for taxes is not an estoppel between the parties as to taxes of any other year, even though such adjudication involves the finding of an exemption by contract, not only as to taxes involved in the suit, but also as to all taxes that might be levied under the contract, the Page 198 U. S. 101 federal courts will not enjoin the collection of taxes for subsequent years on the ground that their invalidity was adj...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Beavers v. Haubert - 198 U.S. 77 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Beavers v. Haubert, 198 U.S. 77 (1905) Beavers v. Haubert No. 355 Argued February 25, 1905 Decided April 17, 1905 198 U.S. 77 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus The rule that, where jurisdiction has attached to a person or thing, it is exclusive in effect until it has wrought its function is primarily a right of the court or sovereignty itself. The sovereignty where jurisdiction first attaches may yield it, and the implied custody of a defendant by his sureties cannot prevent it, although the bail may be exonerated by the removal. Where the court consents, the government may elect not to proceed on indictments in the court having possession of the defendant and may remove him to another district for trial under indictments there pending. Whether such election exists without the consent of the court, not decided. The constitutional right of a defendant t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Whitaker v. McBride - 197 U.S. 510 (1905) U.S. Supreme Court Whitaker v. McBride, 197 U.S. 510 (1905) Whitaker v. McBride No. 135 Submitted January 18, 1905 Decided April 10, 1905 197 U.S. 510 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA Syllabus The question of the title of a riparian owner is one of local law, and unrestricted grants of the government, bounded on streams and other waters, are to be construed according to the law of the state in which the lands lie. Hardin v. Jordan, 140 U. S. 371 . Government surveys of public lands are not open to collateral attack in an action at law between private parties. A meander line is not a line of boundary, but a means of ascertaining the quantity of land in the fraction which is to be paid for by the purchaser. Where the government has surveyed and patented the lands up to the bank of a channel in which an unsurveyed island is situated, a patentee of the land on such bank, although his land may itself be an island...
Tag this Judgment!