United States v. Engerman

E.D. New York

United States v. Engerman

46 F. 176, 1891 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37

DecidedMay 12, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 46 F. 176 (United States v. Engerman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Engerman, 46 F. 176, 1891 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37 (E.D.N.Y. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Benedict, J.

In this matter, which is a proceeding to condemn certain lands to the use of the United States, instituted in pursuance of a statute of the United States passed August 18, 1890, (26 St. at Large, p. 816,) two questions have been presented for decision. One is whether the hearing upon the petition and answer is required to be had before the judge and a jury, or whether it can be had before the judge alone, without the aid of a jury.

Upon this question my opinion is that the provision in the seventh amendment to the constitution of the United States, upon which the respondents rely, does not entitle the defendants, as a matter of right, to a trial by jury, and consequently that the refusal of the respondents’ request for a trial by jury was not error.

The second question is whether the evidence produced is sufficient to prove that the parties were unable to agree upon a price to be paid for the land, within the meaning of the provision in the general statute of New York Laws of 1890, to which statute the district attorney has sought to make the present proceeding conform.

Upon this question my opinion is that the evidence is sufficient to warrant finding that the parties have been unable to agree upon a price for the land.

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

Benedict, J.

In this matter, which is a proceeding to condemn certain lands to the use of the United States, instituted in pursuance of a statute of the United States passed August 18, 1890, (26 St. at Large, p. 816,) two questions have been presented for decision. One is whether the hearing upon the petition and answer is required to be had before the judge and a jury, or whether it can be had before the judge alone, without the aid of a jury.

Upon this question my opinion is that the provision in the seventh amendment to the constitution of the United States, upon which the respondents rely, does not entitle the defendants, as a matter of right, to a trial by jury, and consequently that the refusal of the respondents’ request for a trial by jury was not error.

The second question is whether the evidence produced is sufficient to prove that the parties were unable to agree upon a price to be paid for the land, within the meaning of the provision in the general statute of New York Laws of 1890, to which statute the district attorney has sought to make the present proceeding conform.

Upon this question my opinion is that the evidence is sufficient to warrant finding that the parties have been unable to agree upon a price for the land.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 F. 176, 1891 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-engerman-nyed-1891.