Sowles v. United States

U.S. Circuit Court

Sowles v. United States

21 F. 223, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2357

DecidedAugust 6, 1884

StatusPublished

This text of 21 F. 223 (Sowles v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sowles v. United States, 21 F. 223, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2357 (uscirct 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

Wallace, J.

The transcript of the record brought up on this writ of error consists of a declaration filed by the plaintiff, a consent by the respective attorneys for the p] aintiff and defendant to waive a trial by jury, and that the action be tried by the court, and the opinion of the judge of the district court who tried the cause, which concludes with a direction for a judgment for the plaintiff. There seems to have been no plea or answer on the part of the defendant, there is no bill of exceptions, and no formal judgment seems to have been entered.

If it were proper to assume that a judgment had been entered, it would be competent for the plaintiff in error to insist upon any error apparent upon the record, if any exists, and it would then be the duty of the court to inspect the declaration, to ascertain whether the court below had jurisdiction, and whether the declaration sets forth a cause of action, and upon this record only those questions could be considered. Garland v. Davis, 4 How. 131; Bennett v. Butterworth, 11 How. 669; Suydam v. Williamson, 20 How. 427. As the record now is, no such inquiry can be made, and it is ordered that unless within 30 days the plaintiff in error applies for a certiorari to bring up a perfect record, or for leave to dismiss the writ of error and proceed anew, (Elmore v. Grymes, 1 Pet. 469,) the writ of error shall stand dismissed.

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

Wallace, J.

The transcript of the record brought up on this writ of error consists of a declaration filed by the plaintiff, a consent by the respective attorneys for the p] aintiff and defendant to waive a trial by jury, and that the action be tried by the court, and the opinion of the judge of the district court who tried the cause, which concludes with a direction for a judgment for the plaintiff. There seems to have been no plea or answer on the part of the defendant, there is no bill of exceptions, and no formal judgment seems to have been entered.

If it were proper to assume that a judgment had been entered, it would be competent for the plaintiff in error to insist upon any error apparent upon the record, if any exists, and it would then be the duty of the court to inspect the declaration, to ascertain whether the court below had jurisdiction, and whether the declaration sets forth a cause of action, and upon this record only those questions could be considered. Garland v. Davis, 4 How. 131; Bennett v. Butterworth, 11 How. 669; Suydam v. Williamson, 20 How. 427. As the record now is, no such inquiry can be made, and it is ordered that unless within 30 days the plaintiff in error applies for a certiorari to bring up a perfect record, or for leave to dismiss the writ of error and proceed anew, (Elmore v. Grymes, 1 Pet. 469,) the writ of error shall stand dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 F. 223, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sowles-v-united-states-uscirct-1884.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack