Ex parte Norton
Supreme Court of the United States
Original; This was an application for a writ of mandamus to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana, requiring that court to take jurisdiction of, and hear and determine an appeal by the petitioner, Emery E. Norton, from a decree of the district court of that district.
Read the full summary
Original; This was an application for a writ of mandamus to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana, requiring that court to take jurisdiction of, and hear and determine an appeal by the petitioner, Emery E. Norton, from a decree of the district court of that district. The case as presented shows that Norton, being assignee in bankruptcy of G-ovy Hood, filed in the district court a bill in equity against Hood, the bankrupt, John Asberry, sheriff of the Parish of East Carroll, and Henry Frellsen, setting forth that Hood, being insolvent, in April, 1866,…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Wáite
delivered the opinion of the court.
We have had occasion at the present term, in Bostwick v. Brinckerhoff, 106 U. S. 3; Grant v. Phœnix Mutual Life Ins. Co., 106 U. S. 429; St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Southern Express Co., ante, 24, to state the rule applicable to the determination of the question here involved, and we there say:
“ A decree is final for the purpose of an appeal .... when it terminates the litigation between the parties, and leaves nothing to be done but to enforce by execution what has been determined.”
Under this rule, we think,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bostwick v. BrinkerhoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Grant v. Phoenix Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1882
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ex Parte NortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1883