Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

For property taken for public use, see "Emi- | plied to a combination of newspaper managers.
nent Domain," § 2.

For use of patent, see "United States," & 2.
Of army and navy officers, see "Army and Na-
vy."

Of United States officers, see "United States,"
§ 1.

COMPETITION.

Aikens v. State of Wisconsin, 3; Huegin v.
Same, Id.; Hoyt v. Same, Id.

A conspiracy to obtain school lands from the
quish them to the United States under Act
states of California and Oregon, and to relin-
June 4, 1897, c. 2, 30 Stat. 36 [U. S. Comp.
St. 1901, p. 1541], in exchange for other lands,
held within Rev. St. U. S. § 5440 [U. S. Comp.

Unfair competition, see "Trade-Marks and St. 1901, p. 3676], forbidding_conspiracies to
Trade-Names," § 1.

COMPOSITIONS WITH CREDITORS.

See "Compromise and Settlement."

COMPOUND INTEREST.

defraud the United States.-Hyde v. Shine,
760; Dimond v. Same, 766.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

Cases arising under Constitution of United
States as conferring jurisdiction on federal
court, see "Courts," § 3.

Liability of national bank, see "Banks and Constitutionality of act prohibiting peonage, see
Banking," § 1.

COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT.

See "Accord and Satisfaction"; "Release."

An agreement that payment in United States
currency should extinguish a larger amount due
under contract estimated in Porto Rican cur-
rency held binding.-City of San Juan v. St.
John's Gas Co., 108.

CONCLUSIVENESS.

"Slaves."

Constitutionality of act relating to number of
jurors, see "Territories."

Constitutionality of acts relating to pilots, see
"Pilots."

Constitutionality of statute exempting proceeds
of life insurance, see "Insurance," § 4.
Constitutionality of statute requiring vaccina-
tion, see "Health," § 1.
Validity of local assessment, see "Municipal
Corporations," § 1.

Validity of ordinance relating to erection of gas
works, see "Municipal Corporations," § 2.

Provisions relating to particular subjects.

Of finding of Land Department, see "Public See "Commerce," § 1; "Eminent Domain," § 1;
Lands," § 2.

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

"Extradition," § 1; "Taxation," § 2.
Public indebtedness, see "States," § 2.

§ 1. Construction, operation, and en-
forcement of constitutional pro-

visions.

Objection that vested rights of railroad com-
pany under the Northern Pacific land grant are
interfered with by provisions of Act July 1,
1898, c. 546, 30 Stat. 597, 620, settling disputes
arising out of conflicting rulings of Land De-
partment, held waived.-Humbird v. Avery, 123.
Meaning of state statute, as indicated by ex-
clusion of evidence on the ground of its incom-

Of sentence of court martial, see "Army and pentency under it, held conclusive on the federal
Navy."

[blocks in formation]

Supreme Court in determining the question of
the validity of the statute.-Jacobson v. Com-
monwealth of Massachusetts, 358.

Spirit of federal Constitution cannot be in-
voked, apart from its language, to invalidate a
state statute.-Jacobson v. Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, 358.

§ 2. Distribution of governmental pow-
ers and functions.

Supplementary regulations as to location of
mining claims, prescribed by state in addition
to congressional regulations, held not invalid.-
Butte City Water Co. v. Baker, 211.

§ 3. Personal, civil, and political rights.
Freedom to contract, protected by Const. U.
S. Amend. 14, held not unduly abridged by Kan-
sas anti-trust law of March 8, 1897, relating to
combination of grain buyers.-Smiley v. State
of Kansas, 289.

An adult held not deprived of liberty secured
by Const. U. S. Amend. 14, by enforcement
against him of a compulsory vaccination law.
Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts,

358.

Personal liberty secured by Const. U. S.
Amend. 14, held not infringed by Rev. Laws

Mass. c. 75, § 137, authorizing compulsory vac-
cination.-Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Mass-
achusetts, 358.

The limitation of employment in bakeries to
sixty hours a week and ten hours a day, under
Laws N. Y. 1897, c. 415, art. 8, § 110, held
an arbitrary interference with the freedom to
contract guarantied by Const. U. S. Amend 14.
-Lochner v. People of State of New York, 539.
§ 4. Obligation of contracts.

Municipal corporation cannot invoke protec-
tion of contract clause of federal Constitution
against abrogation by Laws Mass. 1898, c. 578,
with consent of street railway company, of pro
visions of contract between that company and
the_municipality_as to paving streets.-City
of Worcester v. Worcester Consol. St. Ry. Co.,
327.

Obligation of contract of employment by non-
resident meat packing house of a resident man-
aging agent held not impaired by imposition on
him under Act Ga. Dec. 21, 1900, of license tax
of $200.-Kehrer v. Stewart, 403.

The imposition on a gas company of cost of
changes of location in pipes under city streets
by construction of municipal drainage system,
under Act La. July 9, 1896, held not to impair
any contract rights.-New Orleans Gaslight Co.
v. Drainage Commission of New Orleans, 471.

Special franchise tax imposed by Laws N.
Y. 1899, c. 712, held not to impair obligation
of contracts by which right to construct street
railways in the city of New York was granted.
-People of State of New York v. State Board
of Tax Com'rs, 705, 715.

§ 5. Retrospective and ex post facto
laws.

Substitution, on conviction of murder in the
first degree, under Act N. D. March 9, 1903. of
close confinement, after judgment and before
execution of death penalty, in the penitentiary;
in lieu of confinement in the county jail, held
not to render the statute ex post facto, as
applied to a person convicted before its pas-
sage.-Rooney v. State of North Dakota, 264.
§ 6. Equal protection of laws.

The equal protection of the laws held not de-
nied a retail tobacco dealer by the tax imposed
on cigarette selling by Code Iowa, § 5007.-
Cook v. Marshall County, 233.

Exemption of subsurface street railway in
New York from operation of special franchise
tax authorized by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712,
held not to make statute invalid as' denying
owners of surface railways equal protection of
the laws.-People of State of New York v.
State Board of Tax Com'rs, 705, 715.

Reduction for annual payments in the nature
of a tax covered by existing agreements made
by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, from amount of
special franchise tax, held not to render the
statute invalid as denying equal protection of
the laws or depriving the companies of their
of State of New York v. State Board of Tax
property without due process of law.-People
Com'rs, 705, 715.

Discrimination against Chinese persons in ad-
ministration of municipal ordinance making it
barred room or visit such room or house held
unlawful to exhibit gaming implements in a
not sufficiently shown to enable the Supreme
Court of the United States to declare such or-
dinance void.-Ah Sin v. Wittman, 756.
§ 7. Due process of law.

Assessing by the frontage rule, entire cost of
a street extension held not so manifestly unfair
to owner whose property lies beyond the point
where the improvement ends as to render assess-
ment void.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44.

Due process of law held not denied by a reas-
sessment for cost of a street extension, as in-
cluding work which could not be included in a
local assessment.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher,
44.

Including in a reassessment for the cost of a
street extension a charge for certain work not
authorized by the ordinance held not a denial of
due process of law to a property owner affect-
ed thereby.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44..

ings by which judgment is taken in state court
Due process of law held wanting in proceed-
in favor of the holder, if plaintiff in confession
on warrant of attorney authorizing confession
before commencement of the suit had ceased to
own the note.-National Exch. Bank v. Wiley,
70.

Suffcient provision for notice and hearing to
constitute due process of law held afforded the
owner of real property made personally liable,
and his property impressed with a lien, under
Code Iowa, § 5007, for tax imposed on cigarette
selling on the premises, by sections 2441, 2442.

Lack of any exception in favor of adults as
unfit for vaccination held not to render invalid
Rev. Laws Mass. c. 75, § 137, relating to com--Hodge v. Muscatine County, 237.
pulsory vaccination, though an exception is
made in favor of children in like condition by
section 139.-Jacobson v. Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, 358.

A foreign corporation, whose license to do
business in Texas is sought to be forfeited un-
der the anti-trust laws of the state, held not de-
nied equal protection of the laws, where dis-
criminatory features of the prior anti-trust law
have been removed by Act Tex. May 25, 1899.
-National Cotton Oil Co. v. State of Texas,
379; Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383.

Equal protection of laws held not denied man-
aging agent of nonresident meat packing house
by imposition of license tax under Act Ga. Dec.
21, 1900.-Kehrer v. Stewart, 403.

Street railway company held not denied equal
protection of the laws by a municipal tax on its
business of $100 per mile of its trackage, be-
cause steam railroad company is not subject to
tax. Savannah, T. & I. of H. Ry. v. City of
Savannah, 690.

process of law by Code Iowa, § 5007, making
An owner of real property is not denied due
tax imposed on business of cigarette selling a
lien on the property where the business is_car-
ried on.-Hodge v. Muscatine County, 237.

Due process of law does not require that as
to a person actually selling cigarettes notice be
given of the assessment of the taxes imposed by
Code Iowa, § 5007.-Hodge v. Muscatine Coun-
ty, 237.

The construction by the Iowa Supreme Court
of the annual charge imposed by Code Iowa, §
5007, on cigarette dealers and on the property
and the owner thereof as a tax on the traffic
and not a penalty, is not so clearly erroneous
as to justify the federal Supreme Court in
adopting a different construction on writ of er-
ror as a denial of due process of law.-Hodge
V. Muscatine County, 237.

Due process of law held not denied a nonresi-
dent stockholder in a domestic corporation by
imposition, under Code Pub. Gen. Laws Md.

[ocr errors]

art. 81, of personal liability for taxes on his
stock. Corry v. City of Baltimore, 297.

Lack of any provision for notice to nonresi-
dent stockholder in domestic corporation of as-
sessment of taxes on his stock held not to ren-
der invalid, as denying due process of law, so
much of Code Pub. Gen. Laws Md. art. 81, as
imposes on him as a condition of such owner-
ship a personal liability for taxes on stock.-
Corry v. City of Baltimore, 297.

Due process of law is not denied a foreign in-
surance company by distraining its personal
property under authority of Rev. St. Ohio, §
1095, to satisfy personal taxes.-Scottish Union
& National Ins. Co. v. Bowland, 345; Bowland
v. Scottish Union & National Ins. Co., Id.

Property of a foreign corporation manufac-
turing products of cotton seed is not taken
without due process of law by the Texas anti-
trust act, on forfeiture of its license to do busi-
ness for violating those laws.-National Cotton
Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern Cotton
Oil Co. v. Same, 383.

A state police officer can arrest, on requisi-
tion of a foreign consul, a seaman charged
with insubordination, under treaty provision.-
Dallemagne v. Moisan, 422.

Constitutional guaranty of due process of law
held not infringed by Act Aug. 18, 1894, c. 301,
§ 1, 28 Stat. 372, 390 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901,
p. 1303], making decision of department on
right of Chinese to enter United States conclu-
sive on federal courts, in absence of any abuse
of authority.-United States v. Ju Toy, 644.

Including in the appraisement of capital stock
of a domestic corporation for taxation, under
Laws Pa. 1891, p. 229, the value of coal mined
within the state, but situated in other states,
held to deprive the corporation of its property
without due process of law.-Delaware, L. &
W. R. Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
669.

Street railway company held not denied due
process of law in valuation of a franchise un-
der Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, on theory that it
was ascertained by speculation.-People of
State of New York v. State Board of Tax
Com'rs, 713, 715.

Due process of law clause of fourteenth
amendment held not to wholly deprive a state
of its power to confer jurisdiction on its courts
to administer assets of absentees.-Cunnius v.
Reading School Dist., 721.

CONTRACTS.

Impairing obligation, see "Constitutional Law,"
$4.
Interference with freedom to contract, see
"Constitutional Law," § 3.

Operation and effect of customs or usages, see
"Customs and Usages."

Contracts of particular classes of parties.
Connecting carriers, see "Carriers," § 1.

Contracts relating to particular subjects.
See "Interest"; "Patents," § 1.

Carrying mails, see "Post Office," § 1.
Public water supply, see "Waters and Water
Courses."
To monopolize trade, see "Monopolies," § 2.
Transportation of goods, see "Carriers," § 1.
Use of patent, see "United States," § 2.

Particular classes of express contracts.
See "Indemnity"; "Insurance"; "Sales."
Stipulations in actions, see "Stipulations."

Particular classes of implied contracts.
See "Contribution."

Particular modes of discharging contracts.
See "Accord and Satisfaction"; "Compromise

and Settlement"; "Release."

§ 1. Requisites and validity.

The rule that property' delivered under an il-
legal contract cannot be recovered back prevents
the original stockholders in two competing in-
terstate railroads from reclaiming specific shares
of stock, which they delivered to the stockhold-
ing corporation pursuant to a combination sub-
sequently adjudged illegal.-Harriman v. North-
ern Securities Co., 493.

Parties to a transaction adjudged to violate
Anti-Trust Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209
[U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200], held not exempt
from the doctrine in pari delicto.-Harriman v.
Northern Securities Co., 493.

Contracts with telegraph companies, by which
Chicago Board of Trade limits the communica-
tion of quotations of prices on sales for future
delivery which it might have refrained from
communicating to any one, held not a monop-
oly or contract in restraint of trade, either un-
der Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 [U.
S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200], or at common law.
Grain & Stock Co., 637; L. A. Kinsey Co. v.
Board of Trade of City of Chicago, Id.
§ 2. Construction and operation.

Fixing period of person's absence from his
last domicile which would be sufficient underBoard of Trade of City of Chicago v. Christie,
Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, to authorize adminis-
tration of his property, held not so unreasonable
as not to be due process of law.-Cunnius v.
Reading School Dist., 721.

Safeguards for protection of property of ab-
sentee in case of his return afforded by Laws
Pa. 1885, p. 155, providing a special proceeding
for administration of assets of absentees, held
to satisfy requirement of due process of law.
-Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.

Notice by publication of special proceedings
under Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, for adminis-
tration of assets of absentees, held due pro-
cess of law. Cunnius v. Reading School Dist.,
721.

A municipal ordinance making it unlawful
to visit a barred room where gambling imple-
ments are exhibited held not to deprive any
one of his liberty without due process of law.
-Ah Sin v. Wittman, 756.

References in contract for street lighting to
sums to be paid in currency held not to over-
throw evidence that current foreign money was
to be the medium of payment.-City of San
Juan v. St. John's Gas Co., 108.

CONTRIBUTION.

Terminal company whose negligence in fail-
ing to discover a defective brake on a car deliv-
ered to it has been established by a competent
tribunal cannot enforce contribution from the
railroad company for the latter's neglect of duty.
-Union Stock Yards Co. of Omaha v. Chicago,
B. & Q. R. Co., 226.

CORPORATIONS.

Due process of law as regards taxation, see
"Constitutional Law," § 7.

Due process of law as to taxation, see "Con-
stitutional Law," § 7.

Effect of illegality of contract, see "Contracts,"
§ 1.

Forfeiture of license of foreign corporation as
denial of equal protection of laws, see "Con-
stitutional Law," § 6.

[ocr errors]

Jurisdiction of federal courts, see "Courts," § 4.
Liability of stockholders in national bank, see
"Banks and Banking," § 1.

Restraining enforcement of taxes, see "Injunc-
tion," § 1.

Right of action by receiver, see "Receivers,"
§ 1.

Taxation, see "Taxation," §§ 2, 3.

Particular classes of corporations.

See "Exchanges"; "Municipal Corporations."
Insurance companies, see "Insurance," § 1.
Telegraph and telephone companies, see "Tele-
graphs and Telephones," § 1.
Water companies, see "Waters and Water
Courses," 1.

1. Members and stockholders.
Stockholders' liability in an Ohio corporation
cannot be enforced outside of that state, under
Const. Ohio, art. 13, § 3, where an action in
Ohio courts is alone contemplated by Rev. St.
Ohio 1880, § 3260, as amended in 1894.—Mid-
dletown Nat. Bank v. Toledo, A. A. & N. M. Ry.
Co., 462.

2. Consolidation.

Laches and acquiescence held to defeat any
right of the original stockholders in two com-
peting interstate railway companies to rescind
the contract under which they delivered their
stock to a corporation formed in pursuance of a
combination, under which it would acquire a
controlling interest in the capital stock of the
railway companies in exchange for its own cap-
ital stock. Harriman v. Northern Securities
Co., 493.

A clear preponderance of proof held essential
to establish that the parties to a transaction by
which a corporation acquired, in exchange for
its own capital stock, a controlling interest in
two competing interstate railways, agreed that
the new corporation should hold such stock as
trustee, where the transaction on its face was
one of sale. Harriman v. Northern Securities
Co., 493.

3. Foreign corporations.

Ownership of land in New Mexico by railroad
organized and existing under Act Cong. March 3,
1897, c. 374, 26 Stat. 622, held insufficient, un-
der Comp. Laws N. M. 1897, § 450, to authorize
service on its president, passing through the ter-
ritory on a railroad train, in a personal action
in which a judgment may be levied on the lands
to satisfy the judgment.-Territory of New
Mexico v. Baker, 375.

Service of summons on a director of a for-
eign corporation casually within the state held
to confer no jurisdiction on the federal court,
where the corporation is doing no business and
has no property in the state.-Remington v.
Central Pac. R. Co., 577.

Local correspondents of foreign corporation,
furnishing them with market quotations, held
agents for purpose of service of process.
Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. Ham-
mond Elevator Co., 740.

Service of subpoena on resident treasurer of
foreign corporation held insufficient to give ju-
risdiction over such corporation. Kendall v.
American Automatic Loom Co., 768.

COSTS.

In federal courts, see "Courts," § 5.

COUNTIES.

See "Municipal Corporations."

Adoption by United States courts of state laws
as rules of decision, see "Courts," § 6.

COURTS.

Conclusiveness of finding of Land Department,
see "Public Lands," § 2.
Courts-martial, see "Army and Navy."
Jurisdiction over foreign insurance company,
see "Insurance," § 1.

Removal of action from state court to United
States court, see "Removal of Causes."
Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error."
Jurisdiction of particular actions, proceedings.
or subjects.

Criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," § 1.
Determination of right to property of bankrupt,
see "Bankruptcy," § 2.

Special jurisdictions and proceedings therein.
Appellate jurisdiction, see "Bankruptcy," § 4.
§ 1. Establishment, organization, and
procedure in general.

Federal Supreme Court held not bound on
question of jurisdiction by a prior case in
which jurisdiction was entertained without sug-
gestion as to the want of it.-New v. Territory
of Oklahoma, 68.

Tex. May 25, 1899, as removing discriminatory
Construction given by state courts to Act
features of prior anti-trust laws, held conclu-
sive on federal Supreme Court.-National Cot-
ton Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern
Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383.

§ 2. United States courts - Jurisdiction
and powers in general.
Inequality in valuation for taxation of a
franchise held not ground for injunction in the
federal court, when not made on such a differ-
ent scale of value as to deny the equal protec-
tion of the law guarantied by Const. U. S.
Amend. 14.-Coulter v. Louisville & N. R. Co.
342.

Value of matter in dispute, in suit to set aside
judgment of probate court as fraudulently ob-
tained, is the aggregate amount of claims whose
allowance was procured in furtherance of an
unlawful combination. McDaniel v. Traylor,

369.

[blocks in formation]

616.

taken by the master.-Steigleder v. McQuesten, | sued in the federal courts as a citizen of that
state, after compliance with statutory require-
ments.-W. L. Wells Co. v. Gastonia Cotton
Mfg. Co., 640.

$ 3.

Jurisdiction dependent on na-
ture of subject-matter.
The formal repudiation by a city of its con-
tract with a waterworks company cannot give
rise to a suit under the federal Constitution,
of which a federal court can take jurisdiction
without reference to citizenship.-City of Daw-
son v. Columbia Ave. Sav. Fund, Safe Deposit,
Title & Trust Co., 420.

Assertion that, because real estate cannot be
devised by nuncupative will, attempt of probate
court to exert authority over such real estate
by admitting such will to probate deprived
heirs of property without due process of law,
held not to give federal Circuit Court jurisdic-
tion to construe the will.-O'Callaghan v.
O'Brien, 727.

Contention that state court, in admitting a
nuncupative will to probate without giving stat-
utory notice to next of kin, violated due pro-
cess of law clause of Constitution, held so
lacking in merit as to afford no basis for ju-
risdiction of federal Circuit Court in a suit
to set aside the probate.-O'Callaghan v.
O'Brien, 727.
§ 4.

Jurisdiction dependent on cit-
izenship, residence, or character
of parties,
Allegation in complaint held not sufficiently to
aver that defendant corporation is an Ohio cor-
poration, within the rule imputing to members
of a corporation_citizenship in the state creating
it. Thomas v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State
University, 24.

Jurisdiction of a federal Circuit Court on the
ground of diverse citizenship over suit between
a citizen of Michigan and the board of trus-
tees of the Ohio State University will sufficient-
ly appear, without bringing the persons consti-
tuting the board before the court as defendants.
-Thomas v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State
University, 24.

Federal Circuit Court, whose action was in-
voked by the Republic of Colombia to set aside
an award against it in arbitration proceedings,
has power to award interest from the date fixed
for payment.-Ex parte Republic of Colombia,
107.

That ultimate interest in corporate defend-
ant may be the same as that of complaining
stockholders does not, in determining jurisdic-
tion of federal court invoked for diverse citi-
zenship, require such corporation to be grouped
on the side of complainants.-Doctor v. Har-
rington, 355.

Presumption that stockholders of corporation
are citizens of the state which created it held
not to preclude them from asserting their ac-
tual citizenship to sustain jurisdiction in fed-
eral court to suit by them as stockholders.-
Doctor v. Harrington, 355.

A federal Circuit Court has no jurisdiction,
because of diversity of citizenship, of a suit
against a city by the mortgagee of a water-
works company to enforce the city's contract
with that company, where there is no diver-
sity of citizenship between the city and the
company.-City of Dawson v. Columbia Ave.
Sav. Fund, Safe Deposit, Title & Trust Co.,

420.

Incorporators under a charter declaring that
they have been created a body politic and cor-
porate become a corporation under the laws of
Mississippi, for the purpose of suing and being

25 S.C.-52

§ 5.

Procedure, and adoption of
practice of state courts.

A Circuit Court of Appeals cannot, without
statutory authority, permit prosecution in
forma pauperis of a writ of error sued out of
that court.-Bradford v. Southern Ry. Co., 55.

Right to prosecute writ of error from a Cir-
cuit Court of Appeals without security for
costs held not given by Act July 20, 1892, c.
209, 27 Stat. 252 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 706].
-Bradford v. Southern Ry. Co., 55.

§ 6. State laws as rules of decision.
State tax levy on land conveyed by the Unit-
ed States to a corporation for dry dock pur-
poses, with the reserved right in grantor to the
use of the dock, held to create a lien on the
company's interest alone.-Baltimore Ship-
building & Dry Dock Co. v. City of Baltimore,

50.

The meaning of a state statute, as determined
by the highest court of the state, concludes the
federal Supreme Court on writ of error.-
Smiley v. State of Kansas, 289.

Whether chattel mortgage covering after-ac-
quired property is valid held a local question, on
which decisions of state courts will be followed
by the federal Supreme Court.-Thompson v.
Fairbanks, 306.

Decision of California Supreme Court that
the repeal by Act Cal. March 23, 1901, of au-
thority of municipal bodies to license for reve-
nue abates a suit to recover a license tax, held
under the decisions of that court a revenue
measure, to be so construed in federal courts.-
Flanigan v. Sierra County, 314; Wheeler v.
Plumas County, 316.

Validity under state laws of an ordinance of
county supervisors is, as to the federal courts,
governed by decisions of the highest courts of
the state.-Flanigan v. Sierra County, 314;
Wheeler v. Plumas County, 316.

Whether relation of physician and patient ex-
cluded the former's testimony, under Code Civ.
Proc. N. Y. §§ 834, 836, involves question of
state statute, on which decisions of highest
state court will be accepted by the Supreme
Court of the United States.-Supreme Lodge,
K. P., v. Meyer, 754.

§ 7. -Supreme court in general.

The jurisdiction of a federal Circuit Court
over a controversy between citizens of different
states, claiming under grants from different
states, held to depend entirely on diversity of
citizenship, within rule making decrees of Cir-
cuit Court of Appeals final in such cases.-
Stevenson v. Fain, 6.

Review in Supreme Court of final judgments
of the District Court of the United States for
the District of Porto Rico held not necessarily
confined by Act April 12, 1900, c. 191, § 35, 31
Stat. 77, 85, to cases therein described.-Ama-
do v. United States, 13.

The claim in a written motion in arrest of
judgment that the indictment did not set forth
offense under the statutes of the United States
held too indefinite to give the Supreme Court
jurisdiction of a writ of error to the District
Court of the United States for the District of
Porto Rico, under Act April 12, 1900, c. 191, §
35, 31 Stat. 77, 85, as a case where the Con-
stitution of the United States or an act of

« AnteriorContinuar »