Carter v. United States

22 Ct. Cl. 73, 1887 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 133, 1800 WL 1640
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedJanuary 24, 1887
DocketNo. 14582
StatusPublished

This text of 22 Ct. Cl. 73 (Carter v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Carter v. United States, 22 Ct. Cl. 73, 1887 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 133, 1800 WL 1640 (cc 1887).

Opinion

Weldon, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The counsel for the claimant, in the statement of his cause of action, concedes that this case is similar to the case of Forbes v. The United States (17 C. Cls. R., 132); and that “ it is here made necessary, with a view to a recovery in this case, to show that the court erred in the Forbes Case.”

That case was not taken to the Supreme Court, the sum involved not being sufficient in amount to authorize an appeal to the Supreme Court. The doctrine of stare deeieis, as has been said by a distinguished writer, “is not always to-be relied upon.” Courts frequently find it necessary to overrule cases in order to conform to principle, and are not loth to do so, unless, upon the faith of former decisions, rights have accrued and property has become vested on the strength of judicial finding.

As but one decision, and that not upon a question of property, so as to become a rule of ownership, is asked to be overruled, the court is left free to examine its former adjudication, and announce the result of subsequent investigation and renewed thought.

[75]*75Three members of the court, as at present organized, participated in the decision which we are now asked to reconsider- and change, and by the assistance of additional judges the case of Forbes has been examined in the light of the very able brief filed by the counsel for the claimant; but we find no reason to depart from the law as announced by this court in the opinion of Chief-Justice Drake, and therefore we are compelled to dismiss the petition of the claimant.

Nott, J., did not sit in this case and took no part in the decision.

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

Related

Forbes v. United States
17 Ct. Cl. 132 (Court of Claims, 1881)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 Ct. Cl. 73, 1887 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 133, 1800 WL 1640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-united-states-cc-1887.