Henderson v. Carbondale Coal & Coke Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. The case, as stated by the court, was as follows: On the 1st day of February, 1878, there was existing under the laws of the State of Illinois a corporation known as the Oarbondale Coal and Coke Company. It then executed a mortgage on its properties to secure the sum of fifty thousand dollars.
Read the full summary
APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. The case, as stated by the court, was as follows: On the 1st day of February, 1878, there was existing under the laws of the State of Illinois a corporation known as the Oarbondale Coal and Coke Company. It then executed a mortgage on its properties to secure the sum of fifty thousand dollars. On the 1st day of January, 1881, it consolidated with the St. Louis Coal and Coke Company, under which consolidation the new company assumed the liabilities of the constitutent companies, but retained the name of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brewer
A preliminary question in the first case requires notice : Is the amount in controversy sufficient to give this court jurisdiction of this appeal? What is the subject matter of the controversy? Evidently the leasehold interests held by the Coal and Coke Company. What is the value of those interests ? The pleadings in the intervention proceedings do not disclose it. In the order allowing these appellants to appeal it is stated that, “It appearing to the court that there is a greater amount than the sum of five thousand dollars involved in the property in suit by the intervening petitioners…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Rosenthal v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Gibson v. ShufeldtSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Basset v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Doss v. TyackSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- Prout v. RobySupreme Court of the United States · 1872
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by98 opinions
- Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Complaint v. Scimed Life Systems, Inc., and Robert L. Hess, Cross-Complainant/appellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Brewster v. Lanyon Zinc Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Davis v. SchwartzSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- United States v. Thomas E. JoyceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
- Edouard Legille v. C. Marshall Dann, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
93 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.