DANT
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

U.S. | 1875-10-01
Mr. Justice Swayne, Mr. Justice Field, Mr. Justice Strong, and Mr. Justice Bradley, dissented.
91 U.S. 557 Supreme Court of the United States (1875) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 23 L. Ed. 446 · SCDB 1875-122 · 1875 U.S. LEXIS 1402
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice Hunt

Mr. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion of the court.'

This is an action to recover damages sustained by the' plaintiff on the 14th of November, 1871, in consequence of. the unsafe condition and negligent management of the streets of the District of Columbia. The court below ruled that the District was not liable, and directed a verdict for the defendant.

The case is controlled by the principles governing that of Barnes v. District of Columbia, supra, p. 540.

The judgment is reversed, and a new trial ordered.

Mr. Justice Swayne, Mr. Justice Field, Mr. Justice Strong, and Mr. Justice Bradley, dissented.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Pusey, 47 F.2d 22 (9th Cir. 1931)
    …ection 951 of tho Revised Statutes (28 USCA § 724). It was conceded by the appellees upon the argument that, because of their failure to present their claim as required by section 953, Revised Statutes (28 USCA § 774; Hall v. U. S., 91 U. S. 559, 23 L. Ed. 446; U. S. v. Robeson, 34 U. S. [9 Pet.] 319, 9 L. Ed. 142; Watkins v. U. S., 76 U. S. [9 Wall.] 759, 19 L. Ed. 820; Western Union Ry. Co. v. U. S., 101 U. S. 543, 25 L. Ed. 1068; Yates v. U. S. [C. C. A.] 90 F. 57; U. S. v. Cantrall [C. C.] 176 F.…
  • Johnston v. United States, 175 F.2d 612 (4th Cir. 1949)
    …S. 363, 19 S.Ct. 427, 43 L.Ed. 731; Gibson v. Peters, 150 U.S. 342, 14 S.Ct. 134, 37 L.Ed. 1104; United States v. King, 147 U.S. 676, 13 S.Ct. 439, 37 L.Ed. 328; Folger v. United States, 103 U.S. 30, 26 L.Ed. 364; Hall v. United States, 91 U.S. 559, 23 L.Ed. 446; Hoyt v. United States, 10 Hew. 109, 13 L.Ed. 348. We find no merit in appellant’s argument that the moneys paid him for “increased costs of subsistence” are not within the statutory prohibitions. Section 1765, Revised Statutes, bars “any additiona…
  • Fisher Flouring Mills Co. v. United States, 17 F.2d 232 (9th Cir. 1927)
    …cuted by the Pleet Corporation, a right of set-off would probably exist under the laws of the state; but in actions by the United States the state statute is not controlling. 9 In discussing this question in Hall v. United States, 91 U. S. 559, 562, 23 L. Ed. 446, the court said: “Questions of the kind, where the United States are plaintiffs, must be determined wholly by the acts of Congress, as the local laws have no application in such cases.” Again, in United States v. Cantrall (C. C.) 176 F. 949, 954, i…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw