Hogg v. Emerson
Supreme Court of the United States
This case was brought 'up from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. ' It was reported in 6 Howard, 437, and at the conclusion of the report, of that case is the following.note: — “ Note. — After the. delivery of this opinion, the counsel for - the plaintiffs in error suggested that other questions were made below, which they desired id be considered, and therefore moved for another certiorari to bring them up.' This'was allowed, and…
Read the full summary
This case was brought 'up from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. ' It was reported in 6 Howard, 437, and at the conclusion of the report, of that case is the following.note: — “ Note. — After the. delivery of this opinion, the counsel for - the plaintiffs in error suggested that other questions were made below, which they desired id be considered, and therefore moved for another certiorari to bring them up.' This'was allowed, and judgment suspended till the next term.” Another certiorari was issued, which brought up the entire record. The case, as…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woodbury
This is the same case which has been before us on a former occasion, as reported in 6 Howard, 437.
The decision there announced on the points presented by that record was accompanied by a ruling that, in writs of error in patent cases* all the questions of law which arose at the trial might be brought up, and not, as there, only such as the court below should deem reasonable, Thereupon the cotmsel for the plaintiffs in enor moved for a cernorari to transfer here such other questions as had not been before brought up and decided. ' s
This certiorari and a subsequent one having been allowed, the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- President of the Bank of the United States v. President of the Bank of GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
- Boyd v. McAlpinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Ohio · 1844
- Hill v. NorvellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan · 1845
3Cited by46 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Karl Ziegler, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Phillips Petroleum Company, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- United States Ex Rel. Steinmetz v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.