Barr v. Mayor of New Brunswick

Third Circuit

Barr v. Mayor of New Brunswick

72 F. 689, 19 C.C.A. 71, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1745

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 9, 1896

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 72 F. 689 (Barr v. Mayor of New Brunswick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barr v. Mayor of New Brunswick, 72 F. 689, 19 C.C.A. 71, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1745 (3d Cir. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

ACHESON, Circuit Judge.

The only question in this appeal is whether the proposed acts of the appellees, the defendants below, under an ordinance of the city of New Brunswick, N, J., would be contrary to and in violation of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States, in that the same would deprive the appellant of his property without due process of law. Clearly, the case is one which “involves the construction or application of the constitution of the United States,” or in which “the law of a state is claimed to be in contravention of the constitution of the United States”; and therefore, under sections 5 and 6 of the act “To establish circuit courts of appeal,” etc., approved March 3,1891, this court has no jurisdiction to review the decision of the court below upon that question. McLish v. Roff, 141 U. S. 661, 12 Sup. Ct. 118; Lau Ow Bew v. U. S., 144 U. S. 47, 56, 12 Sup. Ct. 517.

The motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction must be allowed. Appeal dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ACHESON, Circuit Judge.

The only question in this appeal is whether the proposed acts of the appellees, the defendants below, under an ordinance of the city of New Brunswick, N, J., would be contrary to and in violation of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States, in that the same would deprive the appellant of his property without due process of law. Clearly, the case is one which “involves the construction or application of the constitution of the United States,” or in which “the law of a state is claimed to be in contravention of the constitution of the United States”; and therefore, under sections 5 and 6 of the act “To establish circuit courts of appeal,” etc., approved March 3,1891, this court has no jurisdiction to review the decision of the court below upon that question. McLish v. Roff, 141 U. S. 661, 12 Sup. Ct. 118; Lau Ow Bew v. U. S., 144 U. S. 47, 56, 12 Sup. Ct. 517.

The motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction must be allowed. Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 F. 689, 19 C.C.A. 71, 1896 U.S. App. LEXIS 1745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barr-v-mayor-of-new-brunswick-ca3-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack