United States Ex Rel. Parish v. MacVeagh
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR . TO THE COURT OP APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. This is a, writ of error directed to review the judgment of the Court of Appeals of the District of'Columbia affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court dismissing a'petition for man-d'amus to require Leslie M. Shaw, then Secretary of the Treasury, to issue a draft ip favor of the petitioner, plaintiff in error here, for the sum of $181,358.95, in payment of a claim referred td'him by an act of Congress, approved…
Read the full summary
ERROR . TO THE COURT OP APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. This is a, writ of error directed to review the judgment of the Court of Appeals of the District of'Columbia affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court dismissing a'petition for man-d'amus to require Leslie M. Shaw, then Secretary of the Treasury, to issue a draft ip favor of the petitioner, plaintiff in error here, for the sum of $181,358.95, in payment of a claim referred td'him by an act of Congress, approved February 17, 1903, Shaw, pending the appeal; resigned, and Cortelyou, his successor in office, was made a party in his…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKenna
It will be observed that the controversy in this case started in a contract of no uncertainty of meaning, and an ordinary' action for damages for its breach, but has accumulated- inci-' dents and complexity, ancfhas.finally terminated in a dispute ovér an ambiguous statute'..
The case was submitted in the Supreme Court of the District upon what may be called a demurrer to the return, which was regarded, and is now regarded, as presenting the question of the power of the Secretary of the Treasury under the act of Congress. This is the ultimate question. If that officer had the power, which he…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. BehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- United States Ex Rel. Riverside Oil Co. v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Parish v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
3Cited by28 opinions
- United States v. BabcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Dismuke v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- McGowan v. ParishSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Houston v. OrmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.