Conrad's Lots

Supreme Court

Conrad's Lots

87 U.S. 115, 22 L. Ed. 328, 20 Wall. 115, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1492

DecidedMay 18, 1874

StatusPublished

This text of 87 U.S. 115 (Conrad's Lots) 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

Conrad's Lots, 87 U.S. 115, 22 L. Ed. 328, 20 Wall. 115, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1492 (1874).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice STRONG

delivered the opinion of the court.

Wo have just decided in the case of the United States v. Ten Lots of Ground, the property of C. M. Conrad (it being a. writ of error sued-out by the United States), that the -judgment of the Circuit Court was erroneous, and reversed it, ordering that the decree of confiscation be- affirmed. This leaves nothing upon which the present writ of error can act. The judgment having been reversed, the order of confirmation of the sale, as well as tho.ordcr of distribution, fall with it. We can,-therefore, only repeat the judgment given in the former case, which was a judgment of reversal.

Judgment reversed.'-

*117 Justices CLIFFORD, DAVIS, and FIELD dissented from the judgment rendered, and wore of opinion that only so much of the judgment of the Circuit Court should bo reversed as confirmed the sale made under the decree of the District Coart.

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

Mr. Justice STRONG

delivered the opinion of the court.

Wo have just decided in the case of the United States v. Ten Lots of Ground, the property of C. M. Conrad (it being a. writ of error sued-out by the United States), that the -judgment of the Circuit Court was erroneous, and reversed it, ordering that the decree of confiscation be- affirmed. This leaves nothing upon which the present writ of error can act. The judgment having been reversed, the order of confirmation of the sale, as well as tho.ordcr of distribution, fall with it. We can,-therefore, only repeat the judgment given in the former case, which was a judgment of reversal.

Judgment reversed.'-

*117 Justices CLIFFORD, DAVIS, and FIELD dissented from the judgment rendered, and wore of opinion that only so much of the judgment of the Circuit Court should bo reversed as confirmed the sale made under the decree of the District Coart.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 U.S. 115, 22 L. Ed. 328, 20 Wall. 115, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conrads-lots-scotus-1874.