Legal Opinion
Dobson v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 4, 1929PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
If we had in the first place any jurisdiction over the causes,, it ceased when the 1928 term opened, the mandates having already left us. Reynolds v. Manhattan Trust Co., 109 F. 97 (C. C. A. 8); Waskey v. Hammer, 179 F. 273 (C. C. A. 9); Watts, Watts & Co. v. Unione, etc., 239 F. 1023 (C. C. A. 2); Sundh Electric Co. v. Cutler-Hammer Mfg. Co., 244 F. 170 (C. C. A. 2). We may assume, however, that, if we had no jurisdiction, it is possible and proper at any time to purge our records of what they should not contain.
The argument is that, since an appeal from a decree in the admiralty is a new…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Yeaton and Others, of the Schooner General Pinkney and Cargo v. The United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- T. M. Duche & Sons, Ltd. v. American Schooner "John Twohy"Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- The LucilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Waskey v. HammerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Petterson Lighterage & T. Corp. v. New York Central R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Untersinger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1950
- Briggs v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Eureka Productions, Inc. v. MulliganCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Nachod v. Engineering & Research Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939