BETHELL
v.
MATHEWS

U.S. | 1871-12-01
13 Wall. 1 Supreme Court of the United States (1871) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 20 L. Ed. 556 · 1871 U.S. LEXIS 1300 · SCDB 1871-089
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
The CHIEF JUSTICE:

The CHIEF JUSTICE:

It has been often decided that a plaintiff in error cannot take advantage of rulings upon exceptions in his own favor, even if erroneous. Nor can a statement of facts signed by counsel be noticed upon error.* In this case, then, not only was the statement so signed, but it’ does not appear to have been made and filed until after the judgment.

There is, therefore, no error in the record, or none of which we can take notice. The judgment of the Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana must be

Affirmed.

*

Generes v. Bonnemer, 7 Wallace, 564; Avendano v. Gay, 8 Id. 376; Kearney v. Case, 12 Id. 276.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Bank OF Edenton v. United States, 152 F.2d 251 (4th Cir. 1945)
  • Mercelis v. Wilson, 235 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1915)
    …sented that the Bill should be converted into a proceeding to quiet title. Cowley v. Northern Pacific R. R., 159 U. S. 569; Perego v. Dodge, 163 U. S. 160; United States v. Memphis, 97 U. S. 284; Connell v. Smiley, 156 U. S. 335; Bethell v. Mathews, 13 Wall. 1, 2. The case involved the fixing of a. line. When that question was settled it was proper to quiet the title of each party as against the other up to the line thus established. The findings support the decree, which not only operated to prevent the…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw