In Re Sherman

Supreme Court

In Re Sherman

124 U.S. 364, 8 S. Ct. 505, 31 L. Ed. 423, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 1869

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 23, 1888

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 124 U.S. 364 (In Re Sherman) 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

In Re Sherman, 124 U.S. 364, 8 S. Ct. 505, 31 L. Ed. 423, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 1869 (1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Me. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

Phis motion is denied. The object of the petitioner, is to compel the Circuit Court of th'e United States for the Southern *369 District of New York to set aside an order granting a motion to remand a suit against Mm, wMch he had caused to be removed from a state court, and to proceed to a rehearing, on the ground that at the former hearing the court did not have before it and did not see the complaint in the case on which he relied to show his right to a removal. ■ The petition makes it apparent that the motion was submitted by both parties, and decided on the papers then furnished. If, in point of fact, the complaint was not 'included among those papers, and it had been omitted by mistake, a rehearing might have been granted in the discretion of the court upon a showing to that effect, but this court has no power to require that court to do so by mandamus.

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

Me. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

Phis motion is denied. The object of the petitioner, is to compel the Circuit Court of th'e United States for the Southern *369 District of New York to set aside an order granting a motion to remand a suit against Mm, wMch he had caused to be removed from a state court, and to proceed to a rehearing, on the ground that at the former hearing the court did not have before it and did not see the complaint in the case on which he relied to show his right to a removal. ■ The petition makes it apparent that the motion was submitted by both parties, and decided on the papers then furnished. If, in point of fact, the complaint was not 'included among those papers, and it had been omitted by mistake, a rehearing might have been granted in the discretion of the court upon a showing to that effect, but this court has no power to require that court to do so by mandamus.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 U.S. 364, 8 S. Ct. 505, 31 L. Ed. 423, 1888 U.S. LEXIS 1869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sherman-scotus-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack