Callan v. May
Supreme Court of the United States
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia. The record brought up by this appeal showed that in 1862 a causci was pending in the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia designated as Staiham et al. vs. Callan et al. In that cause the Court made certain decrees and decretal orders in pursuance of which a sale was made by trustees of some real property in'the City of Washington.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia. The record brought up by this appeal showed that in 1862 a causci was pending in the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia designated as Staiham et al. vs. Callan et al. In that cause the Court made certain decrees and decretal orders in pursuance of which a sale was made by trustees of some real property in'the City of Washington. The purchaser at the first sale made by the trustees was J. J. Waring, whose contract was annulled by his failure to comply with the terms of it. Another sale was then regularly…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Taney
This appeal must be dismissed. The application of May for process to obtain possession of the land was not a suit in which any final decree could be passed so as 1,0 give to either party a right to appeal. The proceedings in the Circuit Court after its decree was affirmed in the case of Statham, Smithson & Co. vs. Callan, et al., were nothing more than proceedings required to carry into execution that decree. And when May had become the purchaser, and the sale was ratified by the Court, and he had complied with the conditions of the sale, he was entitled, as a matter of course, to the process…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Attorney General v. BarbourMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- United States v. EmholtSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Capehart v. LoganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
- Stroheim v. DeimelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1897
- Gunn v. BlackCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.