Blitz v. Brown
74 U.S. 693, 19 L. Ed. 280, 7 Wall. 693, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1053
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the. court.
The filing of such a paper, as has been filed in this case, is not tLe filing of the transcript at the next term after the *694 issuing of the writ of error, without which we can have no jurisdiction of the case. The motion to dismiss must be allowed.
• So much of the motion made in behalf of the plaintiff in error as asks' leave to withdiaw the record is .granted; but the residue of' the motion mustJbe denied. The case can be brought here only by a new writ of error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Blitz v. Brown, 74 U.S. 693, 19 L. Ed. 280, 7 Wall. 693, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1053 (1869).
74 U.S. 693 (Blitz v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In Re Basin State Bank
296 P. 1074 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1931)
Buehl v. American Indemnity Co.
1919 OK 19 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1919)
Billus v. State
1912 OK CR 118 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1912)
Dobbs v. State
1911 OK CR 101 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1911)
Nashua & Lowell R. v. Boston & Lowell R.
61 F. 237 (First Circuit, 1894)
State v. Mitchell
29 Fla. 302 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1892)
Idaho & Oregon Land Improvement Co. v. Bradbury
132 U.S. 509 (Supreme Court, 1889)