Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Mussina v. Cavazos

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 15, 1858PublishedCited by 9 opinions

On motion for a rule on the Hon. John C. "Watrous, judge of the District Court of the United States for the eastern district of Texas, to show cause,, &c.

Read the full summary

On motion for a rule on the Hon. John C. "Watrous, judge of the District Court of the United States for the eastern district of Texas, to show cause,, &c. Mr. Benjamin, of counsel for the said Jacob Mussina and Angela Garcia Lafon de Tarneva, appellants as aforesaid, and two of the defendants in the above-entitled cause, moved the court for a rule on the Hon. John C. Watrous, judge of the District Court of the United States for the eastern district of Texas, requiring him to show cause, on the first-Monday of February next, why a peremptory writ of mandamus should not issue, directing him to…

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McLEAN

A motion was made at this term for a rule on the district judge of Texas to show cause why a mandamus should not be issued, commanding him to allow an appeal in the above case. This rule was granted on the affidavit of Simon Mussina, as agent for a part of the defendants.

In his answer the judge says, “I am now ready to allow the appeal, and always have been; that some time before the 15th day of January, 1857, Mr. Daniel Atchison, of Galveston, stated to him, at chambers, that he wished to take an appeal for Jacob Mussina in the above case, and that the judge inquired whether the time limited…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thomas Deye Owings and Others v. Andrew KincannonSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
  2. Todd v. DanielSupreme Court of the United States · 1842

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Estis v. TrabueSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Clayton v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1880
  3. The BylandsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1916
  4. American Baptist Home Mission Soc. v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
  5. Pflueger v. ShermanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935

4 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