In Re Hohorst
Supreme Court of the United States
ORIGINAL. ■ This, was a petition for a writ of mandamus to the Judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Now York, to command them to take jurisdiction and proceed against the Hamburg-American Packet Company upon a bill in equity, filed in that court on September 15,1888, by the petitioner, described in the bill as of the city of New •York, and a citizen of the .State of New York against “the Hamburg-American Packet Company, a corporation…
Read the full summary
ORIGINAL. ■ This, was a petition for a writ of mandamus to the Judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Now York, to command them to take jurisdiction and proceed against the Hamburg-American Packet Company upon a bill in equity, filed in that court on September 15,1888, by the petitioner, described in the bill as of the city of New •York, and a citizen of the .State of New York against “the Hamburg-American Packet Company, a corporation organizad and' existing under the laws of the Kingdom of Hanover, Empire of Germany, and doing business in the city, of…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr.. Justice Gray,
after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court;
By the Constitution of the Hnited States, art. 3, sect. 2, the .judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority ; to controversies to which the United States shall- be a party; to controversies between citizens of differént States between citizens of the same State claiming lands under grants of different States;- and between citizens'of a State and foreign States, citizens or…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- St. Clair v. CoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Ex Parte Crow DogSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Ex Parte SchollenbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Shaw v. Quincy Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Southern Pacific Co. v. DentonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by173 opinions
- Goldey v. Morning NewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLCSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Ve Holding Corporation v. Johnson Gas Appliance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Barrow Steamship Co. v. KaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Work v. United States Ex Rel. RivesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
168 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.