UNITED STATES
v.
AVERY

U.S. | 1871-12-01
13 Wall. 251 Supreme Court of the United States (1871) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 20 L. Ed. 610 · 1871 U.S. LEXIS 1334 · SCDB 1871-122
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
The CHIEF JUSTICE,

The CHIEF JUSTICE,

on the following day, announced that a majority of the court were of opinion that the case must be ruled by United States v. Rosenburgh, and the case be

Dismissed eor want oe jurisdiction.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Hamilton, 109 U.S. 63 (U.S. 1883)
    …senburgh, 7 Wall. 580, we decided the precise point, that this court cannot take cognizance of a division of opinion between the judges of a circuit court upon a motion to quash an indictment. This decision was re-affirmed in United States v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251, and in United States v. Canda, decided at October term 1881. The ease, not being properly before us, is dismissed.…
  • Hill v. United States, 15 F.2d 14 (8th Cir. 1926)
    …made in behalf of defendants, it is usually refused, unless in the clearest cases, and the grounds of it are left to be availed of, if available, upon demurrer or motion in arrest of judgment.” The same view is expressed in United States v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251, 20 L. Ed. 610; United States v. Hamilton, 109 U. S. 63, 3 S. Ct. 9, 27 L. Ed. 857; Logan v. United States, 144 U. S. 263, 282, 12 S. Ct. 617, 36 L. Ed. 429; Durland v. United States, 161 U. S. 306, 314, 16 S. Ct. 508, 40 L. Ed. 709; McGregor v. Uni…
  • United States v. Canda, 26 L. Ed. 1069 (U.S. 1882)
    …This case comes here on a certificate of division as to question./ arising on a motion to quash an information, and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, on the authority of United States v. Rosenburgh, 7 Wall. 580, and United States v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251. It is consequently so ordered. Dismissed.…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw