Josslyn v. Phillips
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Michigan
Motion to Allow Attorney’s Pee.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
This ease was remanded to the circuit court for the county of Berrien upon motion of the plaintiff. He now moves for the allowance of a reasonable attorney’s fee under the fifth section of the act of March 3, 1875. Prior to this act the rule had been never to allow costs where a case was dismissed for want of jurisdiction appearing upon the face of the record. It was considered that the court, having no jurisdiction of the case, could not even render a judgment for costs; but by the act of 1875 this rule is so far modified as to permit the court, in remanding a case, to “make such order as to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
3Cited by9 opinions
- Lion Bonding & Surety Co. v. KaratzSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Pellett v. Great Northern Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington · 1900
- Riser v. Southern Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina · 1902
- Kramer v. JarvisDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1949
- Vaughan v. McArthur Bros.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.