Prentice v. Pickersgill
This text of 73 U.S. 511 (Prentice v. Pickersgill) 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.
Opinion
The writ of error in this case was sued out merely for delay. The judgment will therefore be affirmed under the twenty-third rule, with ten per centum damages on the amount of the judgment below.
Affirmed accordingly.
Note.
At the close of the term another case, The Chicago City Railway Co. v. Bour, a suit brought by a passenger against a railroad company to recover damages for an injury done to him, by reason of the negligence of their servants in running one of their cars, was affirmed with like damages, there having been no exception to the rulings or instructions of the court, and the court observing that the case seemed “to have been brought simply for delay.” See also The Douro, 3 Wallace, 566.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
73 U.S. 511, 18 L. Ed. 790, 6 Wall. 511, 1867 U.S. LEXIS 999, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prentice-v-pickersgill-scotus-1868.