Legal Opinion

American Sugar-Refining Co. v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided December 19, 1893No. 153PublishedCited by 8 opinions

In Error to tlie Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. This was an action brought b,y Mrs. Otto Johnson, individually and as tutrix of her minor children, Anthony, Celia, and Anna Johnson, against .the American Sugar-Reflning Company, to recover damage for injuries to her husband, Otto Johnson, from which he died.

Read the full summary

In Error to tlie Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. This was an action brought b,y Mrs. Otto Johnson, individually and as tutrix of her minor children, Anthony, Celia, and Anna Johnson, against .the American Sugar-Reflning Company, to recover damage for injuries to her husband, Otto Johnson, from which he died. There was a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $10,000, from which she remitted $2,500. Judgment was entered for the remainder, and defendant sued out this writ of error. The petition of the plaintiff in the lower court, defendant in error here,…

1Opinion of the CourtPardee, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts). The record shows that the question of jurisdiction of the circuit court was not raised in the court below, and of course the jurisdiction is not certified as involved in the case. The first assignment of error raises the question in this court that the jurisdiction of the circuit court does not appear from the face of the record. The ap-pellee, relying upon the textual provisions of section 5 of the judiciary act of 1891, which is to the effect that appeals or writs of error may be taken from the district courts or existing circuit courts direct to the supreme court…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Bank of Augusta v. EarleSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
  3. The Lafayette Ins. Co. v. FRENCHSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
  4. Ex Parte SchollenbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  5. Shaw v. Quincy Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Rust v. United Waterworks Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1895
  2. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. StephensCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
  3. Atlantic S. S. Corp. v. KelleyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1935
  4. King v. McLean Asylum of the Massachusetts General HospitalCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1894
  5. Red River Line v. CheathamCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1894

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API