Portland Co. v. United States

Supreme Court

Portland Co. v. United States

82 U.S. 1, 21 L. Ed. 113, 15 Wall. 1, 1872 U.S. LEXIS 1221

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 20, 1873

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 82 U.S. 1 (Portland Co. v. United States) 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

Portland Co. v. United States, 82 U.S. 1, 21 L. Ed. 113, 15 Wall. 1, 1872 U.S. LEXIS 1221 (1873).

Pincite

Opinion

The CHIEF JUSTICE,

delivering the judgment of the court, said:

From time to time, the court has adopted rules of practice *2 intended to facilitate the presentation of causes by couusel and their consideration by the court. Finding that these rules, through the inattention of the bar, had failed in a great degree of their intended effect, we promulgated at the last term and for the same end, an amended twenty-first rule, the fourth section of which required that the brief should contain, in the order there stated:

First, a concise abstract or statement presenting succinctly the questions iuvolved, and the manner in which they were raised;

Second, an assignment of the errors relied upon, setting out, in eases brought up by writ of error, separately and specifically, each error asserted and intended to be urged, and in cases brought up by appeal, as specifically as may be, the error alleged to exist in the decree; or, if the error be alleged in a ruling upon the report of a master, stating the exception to the report and the action of the court upon it;

Third, a brief of the argument exhibiting a clear statement of the points of law or fact to be discussed, with a reference to the pages of the record and authorities relied upon in support of each point, and containing, when a statute of a State is cited, so much thereof as may be deemed necessary to the decision of the case, printed at length.

The fifth section of the rule also required that when the error allowed is to the charge of the court, the specification shall set out the part referred to toiidem verbis, whether it be instructions given or instructions refused.

And the sixth section required that when the error alleged is to the admission or rejection of evidence, the specification shall quote the full substance of the evidence admitted or rejected.

The necessity of strict compliance with these rules, especially in view of the greatly augmented business of the court, is evident. It will facilitate as much the labors of the bar as those of the bench. That counsel might have full notice of the rule, it was required to take effect on the first day of the present month of January, and the clerk was directed to have printed copies made. of the rule as amended, and send one *3 copy to eacli of the counsel in all cases pending and not yet argued. In the case before us, this rule has been totally disregarded on the part of tho appellant.

"We shall, therefore, in this case

Dismiss the appeal.

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

The CHIEF JUSTICE,

delivering the judgment of the court, said:

From time to time, the court has adopted rules of practice *2 intended to facilitate the presentation of causes by couusel and their consideration by the court. Finding that these rules, through the inattention of the bar, had failed in a great degree of their intended effect, we promulgated at the last term and for the same end, an amended twenty-first rule, the fourth section of which required that the brief should contain, in the order there stated:

First, a concise abstract or statement presenting succinctly the questions iuvolved, and the manner in which they were raised;

Second, an assignment of the errors relied upon, setting out, in eases brought up by writ of error, separately and specifically, each error asserted and intended to be urged, and in cases brought up by appeal, as specifically as may be, the error alleged to exist in the decree; or, if the error be alleged in a ruling upon the report of a master, stating the exception to the report and the action of the court upon it;

Third, a brief of the argument exhibiting a clear statement of the points of law or fact to be discussed, with a reference to the pages of the record and authorities relied upon in support of each point, and containing, when a statute of a State is cited, so much thereof as may be deemed necessary to the decision of the case, printed at length.

The fifth section of the rule also required that when the error allowed is to the charge of the court, the specification shall set out the part referred to toiidem verbis, whether it be instructions given or instructions refused.

And the sixth section required that when the error alleged is to the admission or rejection of evidence, the specification shall quote the full substance of the evidence admitted or rejected.

The necessity of strict compliance with these rules, especially in view of the greatly augmented business of the court, is evident. It will facilitate as much the labors of the bar as those of the bench. That counsel might have full notice of the rule, it was required to take effect on the first day of the present month of January, and the clerk was directed to have printed copies made. of the rule as amended, and send one *3 copy to eacli of the counsel in all cases pending and not yet argued. In the case before us, this rule has been totally disregarded on the part of tho appellant.

"We shall, therefore, in this case

Dismiss the appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 U.S. 1, 21 L. Ed. 113, 15 Wall. 1, 1872 U.S. LEXIS 1221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/portland-co-v-united-states-scotus-1873.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack