French v. Shoemaker
Supreme Court of the United States
' These were two motions by the opposite parties, in an. appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Virginia. 1. A motion on behalf of the appellee to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction, on the ground of the decree’s being interlocutory and not final. 2. A motion on behalf of the appellant for a supersedeas, or for any suitable order prohibiting the court from' proceedings on the decree while the appeal was pending.
Read the full summary
' These were two motions by the opposite parties, in an. appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Virginia. 1. A motion on behalf of the appellee to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction, on the ground of the decree’s being interlocutory and not final. 2. A motion on behalf of the appellant for a supersedeas, or for any suitable order prohibiting the court from' proceedings on the decree while the appeal was pending. The case was thus: In the year 18§4, two persons, James S. French and Walter Lenox, subscribed for the whole stock of the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clifford
delivered the'opiuion of the court.
Accurate conclusions in motions like the present, involv-. ing important questions of practice, are essential to the correct administration of justice in all judicial tribunals exercising appellate powers, but they are especially so in this court, whether the case is brought here from a State court or a Circuit Court, as the jurisdiction of the court is special and must in, every case be tested by the Constitution and the laws of.Congress.
Considerable importance is attached in this case to the motion for a supersedeas as well as to the motion to dismiss the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- WHITING v. the Bank of the United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Bronson v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1863
- Catlett v. BrodieSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- M'kim v. VoorhiesSupreme Court of the United States · 1812
3Cited by28 opinions
- Kountze v. Omaha Hotel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Kitchen v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Simmons v. TrumboWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1876
- Towers Hotel Corp. v. Lafayette Nat. BankCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- John T. SPANOS, Appellant, v. PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.