Mobile Transportation Co. v. Mobile
Supreme Court of the United States
EEEOB TO THE SUPREME C0UET OF THE STATE OF AT.AHAMA. This was an action in ejectment brought in the state Circuit Court by the city of Mobile,against the Mobile Transportation Company, to recover a portion of the shore and bed of the Mobile itivér in the city of Mobile, between high ivater mark and the channel line or 'point of practical navigability. . In support of its title the city relied upon the following acts: .1. An act of 'Congress approved March 2,1819, entitled “…
Read the full summary
EEEOB TO THE SUPREME C0UET OF THE STATE OF AT.AHAMA. This was an action in ejectment brought in the state Circuit Court by the city of Mobile,against the Mobile Transportation Company, to recover a portion of the shore and bed of the Mobile itivér in the city of Mobile, between high ivater mark and the channel line or 'point of practical navigability. . In support of its title the city relied upon the following acts: .1. An act of 'Congress approved March 2,1819, entitled “ An act to enable the people of Alabama Territory to form a constitution and state government,'and for the admission of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brown
1. Motion was made to dismiss this writ of error for the want of a Federal question, but in view of the fact that defendant’s title depends upon a Spanish grant claimed to have been perfected under the treaty of 1819 between the United States and the King of Spain, 8 Stat. 252, and a patent of the United States dated December 28, 1836, in alleged confirmation of such claim, we do not see how such motion can be sustained, unless upon the' theory that the Federal questions so raised are frivolous and undeserving of further notice. We are of opinion that they cannot be so considered, and the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Illinois Central Railroad v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Pollard's Lessee v. HAGANSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
- Hardin v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Barney v. KeokukSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Packer v. BirdSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Borax Consolidated, Ltd. v. Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Pacific Elevator Co. v. PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Coyle v. SmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Hecker v. BleishSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
- Coastal Petroleum v. American CyanamidSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.