Burke v. Miltenberger
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Supreme Court of Louisiana; the case beiug thus: During the recent rebellion, which broke out in the spring of 1861, the State of Louisiana having involved herself in it, the courts.of the United States, in the year just named, were excluded from her limits.
Read the full summary
Error to the Supreme Court of Louisiana; the case beiug thus: During the recent rebellion, which broke out in the spring of 1861, the State of Louisiana having involved herself in it, the courts.of the United States, in the year just named, were excluded from her limits. On the 1st of May, 1862, however, the government troops had captured and occupied the city of New Orleans, and held military possession of it and of certain small parts of the State which had submitted themselves to the lawful authority. But everything was unsettled and insecure. In this condition of things, President…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Davis
The only question .in. this case for our consideration is, whether the Provisional Court of Louisiana, established by the President on. the- 20th of October, 1862, had ceased to exist, by the terms of the order creating it, on the 8d day of June, 1865, when the plantation in dispute was sold by the marshal of that court, on a fi. fa. regularly issued, and purchased by Miitenberger, who took immediate possession'of it, and has remained in possession ever since.
The institution of this court was a necessity, on account of the disturbed state of affairs in Louisiana, caused by the civil war, and…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Madsen v. KinsellaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- State v. BolenWashington Supreme Court · 1927
- Pueblo v. Sucesión ValdésSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1922
- Eiko Uehara Rose v. Robert S. McNamara Secretary of DefenseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- In re KalanianaoleHawaii Supreme Court · 1895
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.