Pepke v. Cronan

155 U.S. 100, 15 S. Ct. 34, 39 L. Ed. 84, 1894 U.S. LEXIS 2253
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 29, 1894·No. 641·Published·Cited by 25 cases

Opinion

The Chief Justice:

It was insisted upon the argument that the judgment in contempt was not appealable; State v. Davis, 2 North Dakota, 461; but it was conceded that the validity of the law and of thp sentence could be tested by the Supreme Court of the State on certiorari or habeas corpus, and no reason was suggested why, if the judgment of the District Court was the final judgment of the highest court of the State in which a decision in the matter could be had, a writ of error from this court might not be applied for.

Without considering the merits of the questions discussed, the judgment must be affirmed upon the authority of Ex parte Fonda, 117 U. S. 516; In re Wood, 140 U. S. 278; Cook v. Hart, 146 U. S. 183; New York v. Eno, ante, 89, and cases cited.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Pepke v. Cronan, 155 U.S. 100, 15 S. Ct. 34, 39 L. Ed. 84, 1894 U.S. LEXIS 2253 (1894).

155 U.S. 100 (Pepke v. Cronan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fay v. Noia
372 U.S. 391 (Supreme Court, 1963)
Darr v. Burford
339 U.S. 200 (Supreme Court, 1950)
Morton v. Henderson
123 F.2d 48 (Fifth Circuit, 1941)
Novotny v. Ragen
88 F.2d 72 (Seventh Circuit, 1937)
Hale v. Crawford
65 F.2d 739 (First Circuit, 1933)
In re Atcherley ex rel. Atcherley
3 D. Haw. 404 (D. Hawaii, 1909)
Urquhart, Sheriff, v. Brown
205 U.S. 179 (Supreme Court, 1907)
Urquhart v. Brown
205 U.S. 179 (Supreme Court, 1907)
In Re Lincoln
202 U.S. 178 (Supreme Court, 1906)
Wimbish v. Jamison
199 U.S. 599 (Supreme Court, 1905)
In re Dowd
133 F. 747 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado, 1904)
In re Wyman
132 F. 708 (N.D. California, 1904)
Minnesota v. Brundage
180 U.S. 499 (Supreme Court, 1901)
In re Bitting
1 D. Haw. 69 (D. Hawaii, 1901)
In re Marshall
1 D. Haw. 34 (D. Hawaii, 1900)
Markuson v. Boucher
175 U.S. 184 (Supreme Court, 1899)
Tinsley v. Anderson
171 U.S. 101 (Supreme Court, 1898)
United States v. Coal Dealers' Ass'n of California
85 F. 252 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California, 1898)
In re Huse
79 F. 305 (Ninth Circuit, 1897)
Ex parte Keeler
31 L.R.A. 678 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1896)