President of the Commercial Bank of Cincinnati v. Buckingham's Executors
Supreme Court of the United States
. This case was brought up, by a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, from'the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio.
Read the full summary
. This case was brought up, by a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, from'the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio. The-Reporter finds the following statement of the case prepared by Mr. Justice Grier, and .prefixed to the opinion of the court, as pronoünced by him. . Eunice Buckingham, the plaintiff below, brought an action of assumpsit against the plaintiffs in error in the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county, and filed her declaration claiming to recover twenty thousand dollars for bills or bank-notes of the Commercial Bank, of which she was owner,…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice GRIER,
after giving the statement of the case which is prefixed to this report, proceeded to deliver the opinion of the court.
The first and only question necessary- to be decided in the present case is, whether this court has jurisdiction..To bring a casé for a writ, of error or an appeal from the highest court of a- State, within the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, it must appear on the face of thé record, — 1. That some of the questions stated- in that section did arise in the State court ; and, 2. That the question was decided in the State court, as required in the…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Ross v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Tidal Oil Co. v. FlanaganSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Central Land Co. v. LaidleySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Honeyman v. HananSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Central Land Company v. LaidleySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.