Generes v. Bonnemer

74 U.S. 564, 19 L. Ed. 227, 7 Wall. 564, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1035
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedApril 12, 1869
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 74 U.S. 564 (Generes v. Bonnemer) 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
Generes v. Bonnemer, 74 U.S. 564, 19 L. Ed. 227, 7 Wall. 564, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1035 (1869).

Opinion

Mr. Justice MILLER

delivered the opinion of the court.

To permit the judge to make a statement of facts, on which the case shall be heard here, after the case is removed to this court by the service of the writ of error, or even after it is issued, would place the rights of parties who have judgments of record, entirely in the power of the judge, without hearing and without remedy. The statement of facts, filed without consent of the parties, must be treated as a nullity;, and, as there is nothing,on which error of the court below can be predicated, the judgment must be

Affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Aluminum Co. of America
2 F.R.D. 224 (S.D. New York, 1941)
Martin v. Drexel Ice Cream Co.
80 F.2d 768 (Seventh Circuit, 1935)
Ex parte Buskirk
72 F. 14 (Fourth Circuit, 1896)
Hudson v. Charleston, C. & C. R.
55 F. 252 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western North Carolina, 1893)
United States v. Claasen
46 F. 67 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1891)
Coughlin v. District of Columbia
106 U.S. 7 (Supreme Court, 1882)
Hunnicutt v. Peyton
102 U.S. 333 (Supreme Court, 1880)
Snell v. Dwight
121 Mass. 348 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1876)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 U.S. 564, 19 L. Ed. 227, 7 Wall. 564, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1035, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/generes-v-bonnemer-scotus-1869.