Earp v. Coleman

U.S. Circuit Court

Earp v. Coleman

28 F. 340, 1886 U.S. App. LEXIS 2273

DecidedJune 24, 1886

StatusPublished

This text of 28 F. 340 (Earp v. Coleman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Earp v. Coleman, 28 F. 340, 1886 U.S. App. LEXIS 2273 (uscirct 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The jurisdictional right of this court to entertain the bill filed was challenged by a demurrer by the respondents, at an earlier stage of the cause. This demurrer was fully argued before the circuit judge, was overruled, and the jurisdiction of the court was maintained. An answer has since been filed by the respondents, setting forth some facts additional to those alleged in the bill, all pertaining to the question of jurisdiction. The case has been set down for argument upon bill and answer as at final,hearing. The only question involved is the one of jurisdiction, and it has been very fully and ably argued before both the judges of the court. The importance of a prompt decision of the case precludes the preparation of an elaborate opinion. It must suffice, therefore, to say that, upon a careful reconsideration and re-examination of the question, and of the authorities cited on both sides, the court is confirmed in the opinion 'that the decision on the demurrer was right, and that the complainants are now entitled to a decree in their favor, as prayed for; and such decree will, therefore, be prepared by counsel and sub-pitted to the court.

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

Per Curiam.

The jurisdictional right of this court to entertain the bill filed was challenged by a demurrer by the respondents, at an earlier stage of the cause. This demurrer was fully argued before the circuit judge, was overruled, and the jurisdiction of the court was maintained. An answer has since been filed by the respondents, setting forth some facts additional to those alleged in the bill, all pertaining to the question of jurisdiction. The case has been set down for argument upon bill and answer as at final,hearing. The only question involved is the one of jurisdiction, and it has been very fully and ably argued before both the judges of the court. The importance of a prompt decision of the case precludes the preparation of an elaborate opinion. It must suffice, therefore, to say that, upon a careful reconsideration and re-examination of the question, and of the authorities cited on both sides, the court is confirmed in the opinion 'that the decision on the demurrer was right, and that the complainants are now entitled to a decree in their favor, as prayed for; and such decree will, therefore, be prepared by counsel and sub-pitted to the court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 F. 340, 1886 U.S. App. LEXIS 2273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/earp-v-coleman-uscirct-1886.