Rice v. Sanger

144 U.S. 197, 12 S. Ct. 664, 36 L. Ed. 403, 1892 U.S. LEXIS 2068
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 28, 1892·No. 1400·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

The Chief Justice :

This was an action commenced by one Rice against Sanger et al. in the District Court of Bourbon County, Kansas, wherein judgment was rendered February 27, 1888, in favor of plaintiff. The cause was thereupon taken by the defendants to the Supreme Court of that State, the judgment reversed, and the cause remandad for further proceedings in accordance with the views of the court as expressed in its written opinion. To review this judgment, a writ of error from this court was allowed, but after that, the case went back to the state district court in accordance with the-mandate of the Supreme Court, and was subsequently tried therein.

The judgment attempted to be brought here was not a final judgment, and the writ of error is Dismissed.

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

Rice v. Sanger, 144 U.S. 197, 12 S. Ct. 664, 36 L. Ed. 403, 1892 U.S. LEXIS 2068 (1892).

144 U.S. 197 (Rice v. Sanger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Morgan v. Thompson
124 F. 203 (Eighth Circuit, 1903)
Clark v. Kansas City
172 U.S. 334 (Supreme Court, 1899)
MacLeod v. Graven
79 F. 84 (Sixth Circuit, 1897)
Great Western Telegraph Co. v. Burnham
162 U.S. 339 (Supreme Court, 1896)
Union Mutual Life Insurance v. Kirchoff
160 U.S. 374 (Supreme Court, 1896)
Union Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Kirchoff
160 U.S. 374 (Supreme Court, 1896)
Werner v. Charleston
151 U.S. 360 (Supreme Court, 1894)
Hume v. Bowie
148 U.S. 245 (Supreme Court, 1893)
Brown v. Baxter
146 U.S. 619 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Chicago & Northwestern R. Co. v. Osborne
146 U.S. 354 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Osborne
146 U.S. 354 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Meagher v. Minnesota Thresher Manufacturing Co.
145 U.S. 608 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Sherman v. Grinnell
144 U.S. 198 (Supreme Court, 1892)