Davis & Rankin Building & Manufacturing Co. v. Barber

Supreme Court

Davis & Rankin Building & Manufacturing Co. v. Barber

157 U.S. 673, 15 S. Ct. 719, 39 L. Ed. 853, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2219

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 8, 1895

Docket818

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 157 U.S. 673 (Davis & Rankin Building & Manufacturing Co. v. Barber) 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

Davis & Rankin Building & Manufacturing Co. v. Barber, 157 U.S. 673, 15 S. Ct. 719, 39 L. Ed. 853, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2219 (1895).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chief Justice:

This was an action brought against certain subscribers to a contract to recover damages for its breach. Defendants demurred upon the grounds that the. court had no jurisdiction over the subject-matter of-the action, and that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against them. The demurrers were sustained and judgment rendered .in favor of defendants on June 28, 1892. The writ of error from this court was sued *674 out February 16, 1894. It does not appear by the record, but is conceded by counsel, that a writ of error was taken to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 60 Fed. Rep. 465. The jurisdiction of this court is invoked upon the ground that the only question in the case was as to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, but that question was not certified to this court by the Circuit Court for decision, and the writ of error must be dismissed upon the authority of Maynard v. Hecht, 151 U. S. 324; Colvin v. Jacksonville, ante, 368; and cases cited.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

The Chief Justice:

This was an action brought against certain subscribers to a contract to recover damages for its breach. Defendants demurred upon the grounds that the. court had no jurisdiction over the subject-matter of-the action, and that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against them. The demurrers were sustained and judgment rendered .in favor of defendants on June 28, 1892. The writ of error from this court was sued *674 out February 16, 1894. It does not appear by the record, but is conceded by counsel, that a writ of error was taken to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 60 Fed. Rep. 465. The jurisdiction of this court is invoked upon the ground that the only question in the case was as to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, but that question was not certified to this court by the Circuit Court for decision, and the writ of error must be dismissed upon the authority of Maynard v. Hecht, 151 U. S. 324; Colvin v. Jacksonville, ante, 368; and cases cited.

Writ of error dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 U.S. 673, 15 S. Ct. 719, 39 L. Ed. 853, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-rankin-building-manufacturing-co-v-barber-scotus-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack