Lindsay & Phelps Co. v. Mullen
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES- FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. On August 1, 1893, the plaintiff in error commenced its action of replevin against one of the defendants in error, John H. Mullen, to recover possession of a quantity of logs said to be of the value of $15,000. Mullen answered, alleging that he was the surveyor general of logs and lumber for the fourth district of Minnesota; that as such surveyor general he had scaled and surveyed a large number…
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES- FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. On August 1, 1893, the plaintiff in error commenced its action of replevin against one of the defendants in error, John H. Mullen, to recover possession of a quantity of logs said to be of the value of $15,000. Mullen answered, alleging that he was the surveyor general of logs and lumber for the fourth district of Minnesota; that as such surveyor general he had scaled and surveyed a large number of logs in a boom belonging to the Minnesota Boom Company, for which service he was entitled to fees amounting to the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brewer
Upon the foregoing facts the plaintiff contends: First. That' the boom at the West Newton Slough, through which the logs scaled by the defendant Mullen passed was not “ any boom . . . chartered by law ” within the scope of section 2400 of the Statutes of 1894. This contention cannot be sustained. The words “ chartered by law ” are not to be understood as referring simply to' corporations incorporated' under special acts. A corporation which is organized under a general law is as much “ chartered by law ” as one whose organization is provided for by special act. So that on the face of this…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Gloucester Ferry Co. v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- WILLSON AND OTHERS v. the Black Bird Creek Marsh CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1829
- Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Huse v. GloverSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Pigeon River Improvement, Slide & Boom Co. v. Charles W. Cox, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Commonwealth v. GildayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Camas Stage Co. v. KozerOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Waters Co. v. . GerardNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Loring v. Commissioner of Public WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.