Farrar and Brown v. United States

28 U.S. 459, 7 L. Ed. 741, 3 Pet. 459, 1830 U.S. LEXIS 551
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedFebruary 11, 1830
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 28 U.S. 459 (Farrar and Brown v. United States) 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
Farrar and Brown v. United States, 28 U.S. 459, 7 L. Ed. 741, 3 Pet. 459, 1830 U.S. LEXIS 551 (1830).

Opinion

Mr Chief Justice Marshall

delivered the opinion of the court as follows:

The practice has úriifOrmly been, ever since. the seat of government was removed, to Washipgton, for the clerk to enter, at the first term to which any writ of error or appeal is returnable, the appearance of the attorney general in every case to which the United States are a party, by entering his name on the docket- . This practice must have been known to every attorney general, and Ijas never been objected to *460 It might be considered, therefore, as having an implied acquiescence on the part of the attorney general; although it is admitted that there is no evidence of any express assent. We do not say that this practice would be conclusive against the attorney general, if he should at the first term withdraw such appearance, or move to strike it out, in order to take advantage of any irregularity in the service of process. But if he lets it pass for that term,, without objection j we think it is conclusive upon him as to an appearance.

The decisions of this court have uniformly been that an appearance cures any defect in the service of process; and there is nothing to distinguish this .case from the general doctrine. The cause therefore is ordered to be reinstated.

On consideration, of the motion made by the attorney general on the part of the defendants in error in this cause, to dismiss the writ of error in this cause, on the ground that the citation is made returnable to a day during the vacation, to wit, on the first Monday.in January, A.D. 1828, whereas the return day should have been the second Monday in January, A.D. 1828,. it is ordered by the court, that inasmuch as the said defect is cured by the appearance of the attorney general on the part of the. defendant, said motion be, and the same is hereby overruled.

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

Related

Lowndes Bank v. MLM Corp.
395 S.E.2d 762 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1990)
Thomas B. Bishop Co. v. Santa Barbara County
96 F.2d 198 (Ninth Circuit, 1938)
Baer v. Security Trust Co.
33 F.2d 861 (Fourth Circuit, 1929)
Lawrence Transp. Co. v. United States
298 F. 942 (S.D. New York, 1924)
Commonwealth v. Poteet
5 Pa. D. & C. 153 (Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, 1924)
United States v. New York & O. S. S. Co.
216 F. 61 (Second Circuit, 1914)
Fisher, Sons & Co. v. Crowley
50 S.E. 422 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1905)
Blair v. Henderson
38 S.E. 552 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1901)
State v. Thacker Coal & Coke Co.
38 S.E. 539 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1901)
Platt v. Manning
34 F. 817 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1888)
Shepherd v. Brown
3 S.E. 186 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1887)
Romaine v. Union Ins. Co.
28 F. 625 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1886)
Mahany v. Kephart
15 W. Va. 609 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1879)
Steele v. Harkness
9 W. Va. 13 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1876)
Bank of the Valley v. Bank of Berkeley
3 W. Va. 386 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1869)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 U.S. 459, 7 L. Ed. 741, 3 Pet. 459, 1830 U.S. LEXIS 551, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farrar-and-brown-v-united-states-scotus-1830.