Roberts v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The claimants moved for a new trial in this case, which motion the defendants sought to have continued. The claimants did not object to the postponement, but feared that if the motion should be denied they would then have lost their right of appeal.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The claimants moved for a new trial in this case, which motion the defendants sought to have continued. The claimants did not object to the postponement, but feared that if the motion should be denied they would then have lost their right of appeal. To obviate that difficulty the Attorney-General attached to the notice of appeal the following stipulation: “ It is agreed and stipulated that the above motion shall not in any way affect to its detriment the motion heretofore filed for the granting of a new trial, or in any way prevent a hearing and decision…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Chase
The main question arising on the motion before us is this:
Does the allowance of an appeal to this court by the Court of Claims, absolutely and of itself remove the cause from its jurisdiction, so that no order revoking such allowance can be made1?
The Act 3d March, 1833, authorizes appeals under such regulations as this court may direct, provided such appeals-be taken within ninety days after such judgment or decree. .
By our third rule, regulating these appeals, we directed that this limitation of ninety days should “ cease to run from the time of the application for the appeal.” In other…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Burdette v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1879
- Nance v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1888
- Walsh v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1887
- Creecy v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1885
- Kirk v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1893