Wetmore v. Rice
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan
This is an action brought against George W. Rice as marshal, and his sureties, for the penalty of twenty thousand dollars, the penalty of the marshal’s bond on the ground that he permitted a certain vessel, in his custody by legal process, to go a voyage up the Lakes by reason of which she was lost in a storm, and the plaintiff failed to recover his claim against the vessel which had been attached at his instance.
Read the full summary
This is an action brought against George W. Rice as marshal, and his sureties, for the penalty of twenty thousand dollars, the penalty of the marshal’s bond on the ground that he permitted a certain vessel, in his custody by legal process, to go a voyage up the Lakes by reason of which she was lost in a storm, and the plaintiff failed to recover his claim against the vessel which had been attached at his instance. The defendants demurred and assigned several grounds of demurrer: 1. That it does not appear that the court has jurisdiction, the parties not appearing to be citizens of different…
1Opinion of the Court
McLEAN, Circuit Justice.
As the plaintiff and defendants are citizens of Michigan, there is no ground for jurisdiction from the citizenship of the parties. But it is contended that the jurisdiction may be maintained from the character of the case and the act of congress, on the same principle as suits under the patent laws and in admiralty. Jurisdiction is given exclusively in the district courts of the United States in ali eases of admiralty, and express provision is made by law for the exercise of jurisdiction in patent cases. But there is no such provision in regard to suits on marshal’s…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Pierson v. PhilipsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Texas · 1888
- Hagood v. BlytheU.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina · 1889