Henkel v. Cincinnati

177 U.S. 170, 20 S. Ct. 573, 44 L. Ed. 720, 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1784
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedApril 9, 1900
Docket206
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 177 U.S. 170 (Henkel v. Cincinnati) 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
Henkel v. Cincinnati, 177 U.S. 170, 20 S. Ct. 573, 44 L. Ed. 720, 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1784 (1900).

Opinion

*171 The Chief Justice :

Bill for injunction to restrain collection of a special assessment filed in Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, Ohio, and on hearing dismissed. Carried by appeal to circuit court of Hamilton County, heard there, and again dismissed. Appealed to Supremé Court of Ohio, and the judgment of the circuit court affirmed June 14, 1898, it being ordered “ that a special mandate be sent to the circuit court of Hamilton County to carry this judgment into execution.” June 21, “ mandate issued,” and “ original papers sent to clerk.” Opinion, 58 Ohio St. 726: “Judgment affirmed on authority of Cleveland v. Wick, 18 Ohio St. 303.”

January 6, 1899, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio made and signed a certificate that the question whether the assessment was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment was submitted to the court, and that the court decided that it was not.

The record does not show that any Federal question was raised prior to judgment, but it appears in the. petition for writ of error from this court, and accompanying assignment of errors. The certificate of the Chief Justice could not confer jurisdiction. Parmelee v. Lawrence, 11 Wall. 36; Powell v. Brunswick County, 150 U. S. 433, 439; Dibble v. Bellingham Bay Land Company, 163 U. S. 63, 69.

The writ of error is dismissed on the authority of Sayward v. Denny, 158 U. S. 180, 183; Ansbro v. United States, 159 U. S. 695; Oxley Stave Company v. Butler County, 166 U. S. 648; Miller v. Cornwall Railroad Company, 168 U. S. 131; Keokuk and Hamilton Bridge Company v. Illinois, 175 U. S. 626.

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

Related

Charleston Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Alderson
324 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1945)
Honeyman v. Hanan
300 U.S. 14 (Supreme Court, 1937)
Purcell v. New York Central R.
296 U.S. 545 (Supreme Court, 1935)
Connecticut General Life Insurance v. Johnson
296 U.S. 535 (Supreme Court, 1935)
Kansas City, Mexico & Orient Railway Co. v. Texas
241 U.S. 650 (Supreme Court, 1916)
Marvin v. Trout
199 U.S. 212 (Supreme Court, 1905)
Fullerton v. Texas
196 U.S. 192 (Supreme Court, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
177 U.S. 170, 20 S. Ct. 573, 44 L. Ed. 720, 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henkel-v-cincinnati-scotus-1900.