Eustis v. Bolles
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. On February 14,1887, Charles H. Bolles and George F. Wilde, as surviving members' of tbe firm of B. Collender & Company, filed a petition in insolvency in tbe insolvency court within and for the county of Suffolk, State of Massachusetts.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. On February 14,1887, Charles H. Bolles and George F. Wilde, as surviving members' of tbe firm of B. Collender & Company, filed a petition in insolvency in tbe insolvency court within and for the county of Suffolk, State of Massachusetts. On February 16, 1887, they filed in tbe same insolvency court a written proposal for composition with their copartnership creditors, under the so-called “composition acts” of 1884 and 1885, and they therein proposed to pay fifty cents on the dollar of their debts in money. On February…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Shirks
It is settled law that, to give this court jurisdiction of a writ of error to a state court, it must appear affirmatively, not only thafia Federal question was presented for decision by the state court, but' that jts decision was necessary to the determination of the cause, and that it was actually decided .adversely to the party claiming a right under the Federal laws or Constitution, or that the judgment as rendered could not have been given without deciding it. Murdock v. Memphis, 20 Wall. 590; Cook County v. Calumet & Chicago Canal Co., 138 U. S. 635.
It is likewise settled law that, where…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Murdock v. City of MemphisSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- New Orleans Waterworks Co. v. Louisiana Sugar Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Murray v. CharlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Klinger v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Johnson v. RiskSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by115 opinions
- Howlett Ex Rel. Howlett v. RoseSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Ana Maria Lanza v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Fox Film Corp. v. MullerSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- United Fuel Gas Co. v. Railroad CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
110 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.