Newcomb v. Burbank
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by Caleb A. Burbank and another, individually and as executors, etc., against David B. Newcomb and Mary E. Newcomb, as executors, etc. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the Court
NOYES, Circuit Judge.
The courts of the United States exercise only the limited jurisdiction conferred upon them by the federal Constitution and laws. There is no presumption in favor of their jurisdiction. On the contrary, the rule is inflexible that the facts upon which jurisdiction depends must appear affirmatively upon the record. If they do not so appear, it is the duty of every court of the United States of its own volition to deny its own jurisdiction. And it is incumbent upon an appellate tribunal to go further and deny the jurisdiction of the court whose acts it is reviewing, unless…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Grace v. American Central InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Robertson v. CeaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Börs v. PrestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Carey v. DonohueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. StephensCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
- Odhner v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1910
- Rury v. GandyDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1926
- Weintraub v. Fitzgerald Bros. Brewing Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1941
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.