Ex Parte Roberts
31 U.S. 216, 8 L. Ed. 375, 6 Pet. 216, 1832 U.S. LEXIS 468
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The court is of opinión that the present is not a proper case for the interposition of this court, by way of mandamus. The application to set aside the default and inquest, was an.application to the discretion of the district court; and is not distinguishable in principle from- applications to grant new trials. This court has always considered such applications as r'ésting In the sound discretion of the court where the cause is depending, and not a matter for a mandamus or writ of err'or.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ex Parte Roberts, 31 U.S. 216, 8 L. Ed. 375, 6 Pet. 216, 1832 U.S. LEXIS 468 (1832).
31 U.S. 216 (Ex Parte Roberts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Application of William O. Wesseler
367 F.2d 838 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1966)
Application of Max O. Robeson
331 F.2d 610 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1964)
Moist Cold Refrigerator Co. v. Lou Johnson Co.
217 F.2d 39 (Ninth Circuit, 1955)
Otis Elevator Co. v. Pacific Finance Corporation
68 F.2d 664 (Ninth Circuit, 1934)
Cape Fear Towing & Transportation Co. v. Pearsall
90 F. 435 (Fourth Circuit, 1898)
Holmes v. Jennison
39 U.S. 614 (Supreme Court, 1840)
People ex rel. Bristol v. Pearson
3 Ill. 189 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1839)
Ex Parte Joseph Roberts, and Ex Parte George Adshead
31 U.S. 216 (Supreme Court, 1832)