THE UNITED STATES
v.
LANCASTER

U.S. | 1820-03-17
5 Wheat. 434 Supreme Court of the United States (1820) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 5 L. Ed. 127 · 1820 U.S. LEXIS 270 · SCDB 1820-025
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Marshall

Mr. Chief Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court, that it had no jurisdiction of the eause, as the District Judge could not sit in the Circuit Court on a writ of error from his own decision, and consequently there could be no division of opinion to be certified to this Court.a Judgment. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record of the Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, it Was adjudged and ordered, that the said cause be remanded to the said Circuit Court, it not appearing from the said transcript that this Court has jurisdiction in said cause.

a

Neither can a cause be brought to this Court by writ of error which has been carried from the District to the Circuit Court by writ of error. The United States v. Barker, Vol. II. p. 395

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Am. Constr. Co. v. Jacksonville, 148 U.S. 372 (U.S. 1893)
    …nt to sit at the hearing, the decree in which he took part was unlawful, and perhaps absolutely void, and should certainly be set aside or quashed by any court having authority to review it by appeal, error-or certiorari. United States v. Lancaster, 5 Wheat. 434; United States v. Emholt, 105 U. S. 414; The Queen v. Justices of Hertfordshire, 6 Q. B. 753 ; Oakley v. Aspinwall, 3 N. Y. 547; Tolland v. County Commissioners, 13 Gray, 12. The writ of certiorari, authorized by the act of 1891, and prayed for in…
  • United States v. Emholt, 105 U.S. 414 (U.S. 1881)
    …respect. It necessarily follows that the case cannot be brought to this court- upon a certificate of division of opinion between the judge, who is'qualified and the judge who is disqualified to take part in the judgment. United States v. Lancaster, 5 Wheat. 434; Nelson v. Carland, 1 How. 265. The case cannot* be treated as before this court on the appeal from.the Circuit - Court,, without regard to the certificate of division, because it is on the common-law side of .that court. [*416] If it is to be cons…
  • United States ex rel. Fink v. TOD, 1 F.2d 246 (2d Cir. 1924)
    …constitutional or statutory provisions disqualify a judge from sitting in a judicial proceeding concerning a matter upon which he has a personal bias or prejudice, so that he cannot exercise his functions impartially. In United States v. Lancaster, 5 Wheat. 434, 5 L. Ed. 127, a case decided 100 years ago, Chief Justice Marshall, .speaking for the Supreme Court, held that a District Judge could not sit in the Circuit Court on a writ of error from his own decision; and this decision appears to have been reac…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw