KENOSHA
v.
LAMSON
Mr. Justice Nelson delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Wisconsin.
This was an action of assumpsit upon 516 coupons against the City of Kenosha, described in the declaration and notice accompanying it. They were all given in evidence, and when the plaintiff rested, the counsel for the defendants prayed the court to instruct the jury that the bonds, as well as the coupons, should have been given in evidence, which was refused. And further, that the city possessed no authority-to issue the bonds, which was also overruled. The verdict was for the plaintiff.
The first question was decided against the plaintiff in Knox County v. Aspinwall, 21 How. 539, and the second in a ease at the. present term between the same parties. The City v. Lamson, 9 Wall. 477. Judgment affirmed.
Dissenting, Mr. Justice Miller.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tobler v. Beckett, 297 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)…ad, Ky.1968, 430 S.W. 2d 647. In this state it is clear that no attack can be made on a judge who is at least de facto in litigation pending before that judge. Gleason v. Florida, 12 Fla. 190 (1868), writ of error dismissed, 76 U.S. 779, 9 Wall 779, 19 L.Ed. 730 (1869). In order for an individual to qualify as a de facto officer or judge there must be a de jure office. 99 A.L.R. 294; State ex rel. Edwards v. Tippett, 101 Fla. 1117, 134 So. 52 (1931). If the judge in the instant case is not a de facto judge…
Authorities Cited
- The Bd. of Comm'rs of the Cnty. of Knox v. Aspinwall, 21 How. 539 (U.S. 1858)
- The City v. Lamson, 9 Wall. 477 (U.S. 1869)