Colvin v. Jacksonville

Supreme Court

Colvin v. Jacksonville

157 U.S. 368, 15 S. Ct. 634, 39 L. Ed. 736, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2210

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 1, 1895

Docket874

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 157 U.S. 368 (Colvin v. Jacksonville) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Colvin v. Jacksonville, 157 U.S. 368, 15 S. Ct. 634, 39 L. Ed. 736, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2210 (1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Shiras,

after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court.

It is claimed on behalf of the appellant that the appeal may be sustained in this case because it is one in which the question of the jurisdiction of the court b^low is in issue, and thus within section five of the judiciary act of March 3, 1891.

But that section provides that “ in such case the question of jurisdiction alone shall be certified to the Supreme Court from the court below for decision,” and this record does not disclose any such certificate.

Accordingly no course is left open to this court but to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Any discussion of this question of practice is rendered unnecessary by the full treatment it received in the recent case of Maynard v. Hecht, 151 U. S. 324, wherein it was held that in the instance of an appeal upon the question of jurisdiction under the fifth section of the act, a certificate by the Circuit Court presenting such question for the determination of this court is explicitly and in terms-required in order to invoke the exercise by this court of its; *370 appellate jurisdiction, and that the absence of such certificate is fatal to the maintenance of the appeal. See likewise Shields v. Coleman, ante, 168.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Mr. Justice Shiras,

after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court.

It is claimed on behalf of the appellant that the appeal may be sustained in this case because it is one in which the question of the jurisdiction of the court b^low is in issue, and thus within section five of the judiciary act of March 3, 1891.

But that section provides that “ in such case the question of jurisdiction alone shall be certified to the Supreme Court from the court below for decision,” and this record does not disclose any such certificate.

Accordingly no course is left open to this court but to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Any discussion of this question of practice is rendered unnecessary by the full treatment it received in the recent case of Maynard v. Hecht, 151 U. S. 324, wherein it was held that in the instance of an appeal upon the question of jurisdiction under the fifth section of the act, a certificate by the Circuit Court presenting such question for the determination of this court is explicitly and in terms-required in order to invoke the exercise by this court of its; *370 appellate jurisdiction, and that the absence of such certificate is fatal to the maintenance of the appeal. See likewise Shields v. Coleman, ante, 168.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 U.S. 368, 15 S. Ct. 634, 39 L. Ed. 736, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colvin-v-jacksonville-scotus-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack