Legg v. Overbagh
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
Motion to vacate decree of affirmance. In May, 1829, a final decree was pronounced in chancery in favor of the respondents here, the defendants below ; the complainants below appealed, and the cause was set down for argument at the session of this court in September last; the court refused to heat it, in consequence of the indisposition of one of the counsel fox the appellants, and when subsequently other counsel were prepared to ax-guc, the court adjourned the further…
Read the full summary
Motion to vacate decree of affirmance. In May, 1829, a final decree was pronounced in chancery in favor of the respondents here, the defendants below ; the complainants below appealed, and the cause was set down for argument at the session of this court in September last; the court refused to heat it, in consequence of the indisposition of one of the counsel fox the appellants, and when subsequently other counsel were prepared to ax-guc, the court adjourned the further hearing of appeals, and took up writs of error. On the 1st February, 1830, on the application of the respondents, the cause…
1ConcurrenceJustice Sutherland
concurred with the chief justice in opinion that the absence of the council was satisfactorily accounted for, but he thought that both upon principle and authority this court had no longer any control over the cause. This court is entirely appellate, and when proceedings brought here by appeal or writ of error are regularly remitted to the court below, the jurisdiction of this court is gone. If a remittitur issues irregularly, or if the party has irregularly obtained the order of this court, the remittitur may be superseded. In such case, in judgment of law, the proceedings remain here.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Murray v. BlatchfordCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1829