Micas v. Williams

Supreme Court

Micas v. Williams

104 U.S. 556, 26 L. Ed. 842, 1881 U.S. LEXIS 2046

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 16, 1882

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 104 U.S. 556 (Micas v. Williams) 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

Micas v. Williams, 104 U.S. 556, 26 L. Ed. 842, 1881 U.S. LEXIS 2046 (1882).

Pincite

Opinion

*557 Mr. Chief Justice Waite:

delivered the opinion of the court.

The affidavits which have been' filed by the plaintiff in error,, in opposition to'these, motions, are probably sufficient ¡to establish the: fact that the value of the matter in dispute exceeds $5,000. The motion to dismiss is, therefore, denied ; but on-, looking into the record we are entirely satisfied the writ was taken for delay only.' No assignment'of errors has been annexed to or returned with the writ, as required by sect. 997 of the Revised Statutes; and every question presented by the bill of exceptions or suggested upon the argument appears to us so frivolous as to make it improper- .to keep the case here for any further consideration. There was' on the record, as it stood when these motions were made, at least sufficient, color of right to a dismissal to justify us in entertaining with it a motion to affirm in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6, par. 5.

Motion to affirm granted.

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

*557 Mr. Chief Justice Waite:

delivered the opinion of the court.

The affidavits which have been' filed by the plaintiff in error,, in opposition to'these, motions, are probably sufficient ¡to establish the: fact that the value of the matter in dispute exceeds $5,000. The motion to dismiss is, therefore, denied ; but on-, looking into the record we are entirely satisfied the writ was taken for delay only.' No assignment'of errors has been annexed to or returned with the writ, as required by sect. 997 of the Revised Statutes; and every question presented by the bill of exceptions or suggested upon the argument appears to us so frivolous as to make it improper- .to keep the case here for any further consideration. There was' on the record, as it stood when these motions were made, at least sufficient, color of right to a dismissal to justify us in entertaining with it a motion to affirm in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6, par. 5.

Motion to affirm granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 U.S. 556, 26 L. Ed. 842, 1881 U.S. LEXIS 2046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/micas-v-williams-scotus-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack