Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

NICK GURVICH v. UNITED STATES. [No. | BENJAMIN F. MCCAULLY, Petitioner, v. 435.]

On a Certificate from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

No appearance for Gurvich.

UNITED STATES. [No. 651.]

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia.

See same case below, 33 Wash. L. Rep.

The Attorney General for the United 306. States.

Messrs. Arthur A. Birney and Henry F. Woodard for petitioner.

May 1, 1905. On the authority of Rassmussen v. United States, 197 U. S. 516, ante, 514, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 514, the ques-eral Hoyt for respondent. tion is answered that the district court of May 15, 1905. Denied. the United States for the district of Alaska, division No. 1, erred in compelling the plaintiff in error to go to trial before a jury composed of only six persons. Announced by Mr. Chief Justice Fuller.

The Attorney General and Solicitor Gen

WILLIAM S. BRYAN, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH
C. DUPOYSTER et al. [No. 632.]
Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Circuit Court of Appeals for

the Sixth Circuit.

See same case below, 64 C. C. A. 417, 130

Fed. 83.

Messrs. C. C. Calhoun and S. T. G. Smith for petitioner.

Mr. Ira Julian for respondents.
May 8, 1905. Denied.

CONSUMERS' GAS TRUST COMPANY et al., Petitioners, v. BYRON C. QUINBY. [No. 637.] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Mr. Addison C. Harris for petitioners. Messrs. Ferdinand Winter and Alexander C. Ayres for respondent.

May 8, 1905. Denied.

FRANCIS H. DUEHAY, Petitioner, v. Dis-
TRICT OF COLUMBIA. [No. 638.]

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia.

Mr. Samuel Maddox for petitioner.

Messrs. A. B. Duvall and F. H. Stephens for respondent.

May 29, 29, 1905. Denied. Mr. Justice Brewer took no part in the consideration and disposition of this application.

D. G. FRITZLEN et al., Petitioners, v. BOAT-
MEN'S BANK OF ST. LOUIS, Mo. [No. 647.]
Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the
United States Circuit Court of Appeals for
the Eighth Circuit.

See same case below, 135 Fed. 650.

Messrs. D. R. Hite and H. J. Bone for petitioners.

Mr. James S. Botsford for respondent.
May 29, 1905. Denied.

LOUIS A. DARNAL, Petitioner, v. UNITED
STATES. [No. 641.]

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Mr. W. M. Smith for petitioner.
No brief in opposition.

May 8, 1905. Denied.

STEPHEN A. RALLI et al., Petitioners, v. DI-
RECT NAVIGATION COMPANY [No. 639];
P. C. HEINEKEN et al., Petitioners, v. DI-
RECT NAVIGATION COMPANY [No. 640].
Petitions for Writs of Certiorari to the
United States Circuit Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit.

Messrs. John F. Lewis, Francis S. Lains,
and James B. Stubbs for petitioners.
Mr. M. F. Mott for respondent.
May 15, 1905. Denied.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

WILLIAM H. STAAKE, Trustee, Petitioner, v. | IGNACIO ROSALES Y CUELI, Plaintiff in ErWATTS, ROBERTSON, & ROBERTSON, et al. [Nos. 656, 657.]

Petitions for Writs of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

See same case below, 133 Fed. 717. Messrs. H. Gordon McCouch and Samuel W. Cooper for petitioner.

Mr. S. Hamilton Graves for respondents. May 29, 1905. Denied.

MARTHA RAPHAEL, Administratrix, etc., Petitioner, v. RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al. [No. 659.] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

ror, v. DOLORES MOYA Y RODRIGUEZ, Guardian, etc., et al. [No. 431.]

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico.

Messrs. Frederic D. McKenney, J. Spalding Flannery, and Wayne MacVeagh for plaintiff in error.

Mr. George H. Lamar for defendants in

error.

May 29, 1905. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Royal Ins. Co. v. Martin, 192 U. S. 149, 48 L. ed. 385, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247; Baltimore & P. R. Co. v. Hopkins, 130 U. S. 210, 32 L. ed. 908, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 503; Filhiol v. Maurice, 185 U. S. 108, 46 L. ed. 827, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 560; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Louisville, 166 U. S. 709, 41

See same case below, 65 C. C. A. 632, 132 L. ed. 1173, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 725; HarriFed. 12. son v. Morton, 171 U. S. 38, 43 L. ed. 63, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 742.

Mr. Charles Locke Easton for petitioner. Messrs. Wm. Mason Smith, A. H. Joline, and E. M. Shepard for respondents. May 29, 1905. Denied.

[blocks in formation]

EDWARD W. SHOESMITH, Appellant, v. H.
MEYER BOOT & SHOE MANUFACTURING
COMPANY et al. [No. 588.]
Appeal from the District Court of the
United States for the Northern District of
Illinois.

See same case below, on appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals, 135 Fed. 684.

Mr. Wm. R. Payne for appellant. Mr. Gwynn Garnett for appellees. May 29, 1905. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. McLish v. Roff, 141 U. S. 661, 35 L. ed. 893, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 118; Maynard v. Hecht, 151 U. S. 324, 38 L. ed. 179, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 353; United States v. Jahn, 155 U. S. 113, 39 L. ed. 89, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 39; Louisville Trust Co. v. Knott, 191 U. S. 232, 48 L. ed. 161, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 119.

[blocks in formation]

UNITED STATES, Petitioner, v. CORNELL STEAMBOAT COMPANY. [No. 624.] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

PETER PEARSON et al., Petitioners v. WILLIAM WILLIAMS, United States Commissioner of Immigration. [No. 622.] Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for

The Attorney General and Solicitor Gen- the Second Circuit. eral Hoyt for petitioner.

Mr. Robert D. Benedict for respondent.
May 1, 1905.

Granted.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Eugene Treadwell for petitioners. The Attorney General and Solicitor General Hoyt for respondent.

May 8, 1905. Granted.

EX PARTE: IN THE MATTER OF BENJAMIN
[No.
F. MCCAULLY, Petitioner.
Original.]

Motion for Leave to File Petition for Writs of Habeas Corpus and Certiorari. Messrs. Arthur A. Birney and Henry F. Woodard for petitioner.

May 29, 1905. Denied.

END OF CASES IN VOL. 25

INDEX.

ABATEMENT AND
AND REVIVAL.

Adoption by United States courts of state laws
as rules of decision, see "Courts," § 6.
Judgment as bar to another action, see "Judg-
ment." § 1.

Of mandamus proceedings, see "Mandamus,"
§ 1.

ABSENTEES.

Actions relating to particular species of property
or estates.

See "Mines and Minerals," § 1.

Particular causes or grounds of action.
See "Contribution."

Personal injuries, see "Master and Servant,"
§ 1.

Relief against monopoly, see "Monopolies," § 2.
Particular forms of action.

Due process of law in administering assets of, See "Ejectment."
see "Constitutional Law," § 7.

ABUTTING OWNERS.

Assessments for expenses of public improve-
ments, see "Municipal Corporations," § 1.
Compensation for taking of or injury to lands
or easements for public use, see "Eminent
Domain," § 2.

ACADEMIES.

Military academy, see "Army and Navy."

ACCORD AND SATISFACTION.

See "Compromise and Settlement"; "Release."

Particular forms of special relief.
See "Injunction."

Establishment and enforcement of trust, see
"Trusts," § 1.

Particular proceedings in actions.
See "Evidence"; "Judgment"; "Limitation of
Actions"; "Process"; "Removal of Causes";
"Stipulations"; "Trial."

Particular remedies in or incident to actions.
See "Garnishment"; "Injunction"; "Receiv-
ers."

[merged small][ocr errors]

Review of proceedings.

An accord and satisfaction results from the re-
ceipt, under protest, in discharge of a particu- See "Appeal and Error."
lar payment, of a different money medium than
that required by contract.-City of San Juan
v. St. John's Gas Co., 108.

ACCOUNT.

Claim on account against estate of bankrupt,
see "Bankruptcy," § 2.

ACTION.

Bar by former adjudication, see "Judgment,"
§ 1.

Commencement of action as starting running of
interest, see "Interest," § 1.

Jurisdiction of courts, see "Courts."
Laches, see "Equity," § 1.

ADEQUATE REMEDY AT LAW.
See "Injunction," § 1.

ADJOINING LANDOWNERS.

See "Boundaries."

ADJUDICATION.

Of courts in general, see "Courts," § 1.
Operation and effect of former adjudication, see
"Judgment," §§ 1, 2.

ADMINISTRATION.

Limitation by statute, see "Limitation of Ac- Of estate of decedent, see "Executors and Ad-
tions."

Actions between parties in particular relations.

See "Master and Servant," § 1.

ministrators."

ADMIRALTY.

Actions by or against particular classes of See "Seamen"; "Shipping."

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Admiralty jurisdiction of federal courts held
to extend to libel against the vessel for negli-
gently colliding with a beacon built on piles.
driven into the bottom of the channel.-United
States v. Evans, 46.

Public laws in New Jersey are in force in the
littoral waters of Sandy Hook peninsula below
Trustees in bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," § 2. low-water mark, whether enacted before or aft-

[blocks in formation]
« FöregåendeFortsätt »