UNITED STATES
v.
HAILEY, ADMINISTRATOR

U.S. | 1886-05-10
118 U.S. 233 Supreme Court of the United States (1886) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 30 L. Ed. 173 · 6 S. Ct. 1049 · 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1926 · SCDB 1885-258
Cited by 22 cases
Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Waite

Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.

This case has been docketed here as an appeal from the Supreme Court of the Territory of Idaho, but, on looking into the transcript, we find that the suit was at law and the trial by a jury. Under such circumstances the only proper way of bringing it here for review would have been by writ of error. Stringfellow v. Cain, 99 U. S. 610; United States v. Railroad Co. 105 U. S. 263; Hecht v. Boughton, 105 U. S. 235; Woolf v. Hamilton, 108 U. S. 15. In point of fact, however, there has been neither a writ of error, nor an appeal, nor a citation, nor an appearance by the defendant or respondent. It is clear, therefore, we have no jurisdiction, -and the case is

Dismissed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Noel v. Parrott, 15 F.2d 669 (4th Cir. 1926)
    …intend such a flagrant violation of their trust. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. Kutter (C. C. A. 2nd) 147 F. 51, 77 C. C. A. 315; Hobbs v. McLean, 117 U. S. 567, 6 S. Ct. 870, 29 L. Ed. 940; U. S. v. Cent. Pac. R. Co., 118 U. S. 235, 6 S. Ct. 1038, 30 L. Ed. 173. It is no answer to this position to say that the stockholders ratified the gift by accepting the offer of $75 per share after notice that the distribution was to be made, for we are dealing with the interpretation of the resolutions, not with the v…
  • Behn v. Campbell & GO Tauco, 205 U.S. 403 (U.S. 1907)
    …n an action at law can be reviewed, here only by writ of error. This in the absence of modification by statute is the rule in respect to all courts whose records are brought here for review. Walker v. Dreville, 12 Wall. 440; United States v. Hailey, 118 U. S. 233; Deland v. Platte County, 155 U. S. 221; Comstock v. Eagleton, 196 U. S. 99. The defendant, having failed in its appeal, has now brought a writ of error and asks this court to review the facts to the same extent that they would be reviewed on appea…
  • Niagara Falls Power Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 137 F.2d 787 (2d Cir. 1943)
    …ower. We must assume that it may have felt its hands tied to some extent; the Supreme Court both before and since •1920, has held indefeasible a grant, once made and acted upon. United States v. Central Pac. R. Co., 118 U.S. 235, 238, 6 S.Ct. 1038, 30 L.Ed. 173; United States v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 256 U.S. 51, 63, 64, 41 S.Ct. 439, 65 L.Ed. 825. There are said to have been many valid licenses outstanding in 1920, issued by federal authorities which it was at least doubtful whether Congress could “affe…

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw