Börs v. Preston
Supreme Court of the United States
IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR TOE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. This action was brought in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff below, Preston, was a, citizen of that State, while the defendant was the consul at the port of New York, for the Kingdoms of Norway and Sweden.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR TOE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. This action was brought in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff below, Preston, was a, citizen of that State, while the defendant was the consul at the port of New York, for the Kingdoms of Norway and Sweden. The object of the action was to recover damages for the alleged unlawful conversion by defendant, to his own use, of certain articles of merchandise. The answer denied the material allegations of the complaint, and, in addition, by way of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harlan
After reciting the facts in the above language, he continued:
The assignments of error question the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, under the Constitution and the laws of the United States, to hear and determine any suit whatever brought against the consul of a foreign government.
Some reference was made in argument to the fact that the defendant did not in the court below plead exemption, by virtue of his official character, from suit in a Circuit Court of the United States. To this it is sufficient to reply that this court must, from its own inspection of the record, determine whether a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Cohens v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Osborn v. Bank of United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Grace v. American Central InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Robertson v. CeaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by106 opinions
- Matthews v. RodgersSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Capital Traction Co. v. HofSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- United States v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Lehigh Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Williams v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.