Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

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

-Aikens v. State of Wisconsin, 3; Huegin v. For use of patent, see “United States," $ 2. Same, Id.; Hoyt v. Same, Id. Of army and navy officers, see "Army and Na

A conspiracy to obtain school lands from the vy." Of United States officers, see "United States,” states of California and Oregon, and to relin

“| § 1.

June 4, 1897, c. 2, 30 Stat. 36 (U. S. Comp. COMPETITION.

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 $t. 1901, p. 3676], forbidding conspiracies to Trade-Names,” 8 1.

defraud the United States.-Hyde v. Shine,

760; Dimond v. Same, 766. COMPOSITIONS WITH CREDITORS.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. See "Compromise and Settlement."

Cases arising under Constitution of United

States as conferring jurisdiction on federal COMPOUND INTEREST.

court, see "Courts," $ 3. Liability of national bank, see "Banks and Constitutionality of act prohibiting peonage, see

“Slaves." Banking,' g 1.

Constitutionality of act relating to number of

jurors, see "Territories." COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT. Constitutionality of acts relating to pilots, see

“Pilots.” See “Accord and Satisfaction"; "Release.” Constitutionality of statute exempting proceeds

of life insurance, see "Insurance," § 4. An agreement that payment in United States Constitutionality of statute requiring vaccinacurrency should extinguish a larger amount due

tion, see "Health," $ 1. under contract estimated in Porto Rican cur- Validity of local assessment, see "Municipal rency held binding:-City of San Juan v. St. Corporations," $ 1. John's Gas Co., 108.

Validity of ordinance relating to erection of gas

works, see "Municipal Corporations," $ 2. CONCLUSIVENESS.

Provisions relating to particular subjects. Of finding of Land Department, see “Public See “Commerce," § 1; “Eminent Domain,” § 1; Lands," $ 2.

"Extradition," 8 1; "Taxation," $ 2.

Public indebtedness, see "States," $ 2.
CONDEMNATION.

§ 1. Construction, operation, and en

forcement of constitutional proTaking property for public use, see “Eminent

visions. Domain.

Objection that vested rights of railroad comCONDITIONS.

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 In insurance policies, see "Insurance," $ 3. arising out of conflicting rulings of Land De

partment, held waived.-Humbird v. Avery, 123. CONFIRMATION.

Meaning of state statute, as indicated by ex

clusion of evidence on the ground of its incomOf sentence of court martial, see "Army and pentency under it, held conclusive on the federal Navy."

Supreme Court in determining the question of

the validity of the statute.-Jacobson v. ComCONFLICT OF LAWS.

monwealth of Massachusetts, 358. See “Insurance," $ 2.

Spirit of federal Constitution cannot be invoked, apart from its language, to invalidate a

state statute.—Jacobson v. Commonwealth of CONNECTING CARRIERS.

Massachusetts, 358. See "Carriers," 8 1.

§ 2. Distribution of governmental pow

ers and functions. CONSOLIDATION.

Supplementary regulations as to location of

mining claims, prescribed by state in addition Of corporations, see "Corporations," $ 2.

to congressional regulations, held not invalid.

Butte City Water Co. v. Baker, 211.
CONSPIRACY.

§ 3. Personal, civil, and political rights.

Freedom to contract, protected by Const. U. Combinations to monopolize trade, see “Monop- S. Amend. 14, held not unduly abridged by Kanolies," $ 2.

sas anti-trust law of March 8, 1897, relating to Habeas corpus to determine sufficiency of in- combination of grain buyers.—Smiley v. State dictment, see "Habeas Corpus," $ 1.

of Kansas, 289. Jurisdiction of criminal conspiracy, see “Crim- An adult held not deprived of liberty secured inal Law," $ 1.

by Const. U. S. Amend. 14, by enforcement 1. Criminal responsibility.

against him of a compulsory vaccination law.Rights under Const. U. S. Amend. 14. hela Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts,

358. not infringed by Rev. St. Wis. 1898, 8 4466a, punishing combinations for the purpose of will- Personal liberty secured by Const. U. S. fully injuring another in his business, as ap- Amend. 14, held not infringed by Rev. Laws Mass. c. 75, $ 137, authorizing compulsory vac- Exemption of subsurface street railway in cination.—Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Mass- New York from operation of special franchise achusetts, 358.

tax authorized by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, The limitation of employment in bakeries to held not to make statute invalid as' denying sixty hours a week and ten hours a day, under owners of surface railways equal protection of Laws N. Y. 1897, c. 415, art. 8,$ 110, held the laws.- People of State of New York v. an arbitrary interference 'with the freedom to State Board of Tax Com’rs, 705, 715. contract guarantied by Const. U. S. Amend 14. Reduction for annual payments in the nature -Lochner v. People of State of New York, 539. of a tax covered by existing agreements made § 4. Obligation of contracts.

by Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, from amount of Municipal corporation cannot invoke protec- special franchise tax, held not to render the tion of contract clause of federal Constitution statute invalid as denying equal protection of against abrogation by Laws Mass. 1898, c. 578, the laws or depriving the companies of their with consent of street railway company, of pro- property without due process of law. People

visions of contract between that company and of State of New York v. State Board of Tax

, the municipality as to paving streets.-City Com’rs, 705, 715. of Worcester v. Worcester Consol. St. Ry. Co., Discrimination against Chinese persons in ad327.

ministration of municipal ordinance making it Obligation of contract of employment by non- barred room or visit such room or house held

unlawful to exhibit gaming implements in a resident meat packing house of a resident managing agent held not impaired by imposition on Court of the United States to declare such or

not sufficiently shown to enable the Supreme him under Act Ga. Dec. 21, 1900, of license tax dinance void.—Ah Sin v. Wittman, 756. of $200.-Kehrer v. Stewart, 403.

The imposition on a gas company of cost of $ 7. Due process of law. changes of location in pipes under city streets Assessing by the frontage rule, entire cost of by construction of municipal drainage system, a street extension held not so manifestly unfair under Act La. July 9, 1896, held not to impair to owner whose property lies beyond the point any contract rights.- New Orleans Gaslight Co. where the improvement ends as to render assessv. Drainage Commission of New Orleans, 471. ment void. —City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44.

Special franchise tax imposed by Laws N. Due process of law held not denied by a reasY. 1899, c. 712, held not to impair obligation sessment for cost of a street extension, as inof contracts by which right to construct street cluding work which could not be included in a railways in the city of New York was granted. local assessment.—City of Seattle v. Kelleher, - People of State of New York v. State Board 44. of Tax Com'rs, 703, 715.

Including in a reassessment for the cost of a § 5. Retrospective and ex post facto street extension a charge for certain work not laws.

authorized by the ordinance held not a denial of Substitution, on conviction of murder in the due process of law to a property owner affectfirst degree, under Act N. D. March 9, 1903, of ed thereby.-City of Seattle v. Kelleher, 44. close confinement, after judgment and before execution of death penalty, in the penitentiary

Due process of law held wanting in proceedin lieu of confinement in the county jail, helå ings by which judgment is taken in state court not to render the statute ex post facto, as in favor of the holder, if plaintiff in confession

on warrant of attorney authorizing confession applied_to a person convicted before its pas- before commencement of the suit had ceased to sage.—Rooney v. State of North Dakota, 264.

own the note.—National Exch. Bank v. Wiley, § 6. Equal protection of laws.

70. The equal protection of the laws held not de

Suffcient provision for notice and hearing to nied a retail tobacco dealer by the tax imposed constitute due process of law held afforded the on cigarette selling by Code Iowa, § 5007.— owner of real property made personally liable, Cook v. Marshall County, 233.

and his property_impressed with a lien, under Lack of any exception in favor of adults as Code Iowa, $ 5007, for tax imposed on cigarette unfit for vaccination held not to render invalid selling on the premises, by sections 2441, 2442. 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 process of law by Code Iowa, g 5007, making

An owner of real property is not denied due section 139.—Jacobson v. Commonwealth of tax imposed on business of cigarette selling a Massachusetts, 358.

lien on the property where the business is carA foreign_corporation, whose license to do ried on.-Hodge v. Muscatine County, 237. business in Texas is sought to be forfeited under the anti-trust laws of the state, held vot de to a person actually selling cigarettes notice be

Due process of law does not require that as nied equal protection of the laws, where discriminatory features of the prior anti-trust law giveu of the assessment of the taxes imposed by

$ have been removed by Act Tex. May 25, 1899. Code Iowa, § 5007.-Hodge v. Muscatine Coun-National Cotton Oil Co. v. State of Texas,

ty, 237. 379; Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383. The construction by the Iowa Supreme Court Equal protection of laws held not denied man- 5007, on cigarette dealers and on the property

of the annual charge imposed by Code Iowa, $ aging agent of nonresident meat packing house and 'the owner thereof as a tax on the traffic by imposition of license tax under Act Ga. Dec. and not a penalty, is not so clearly erroneous 21, 1900.-Kehrer v. Stewart, 403.

as to justify the federal Supreme Court in Street railway company held not denied equal adopting a different construction on writ of erprotection of the laws by a municipal tax on its ror as a denial of due process of law.-Hodge business of $100 per mile of its trackage. be- v. Muscatine County, 237. cause steam railroad company is not subject to Due process of law held not denied a nonresitax.–Savannah, T. & I. of H. Ry. v. City of dent stockholder in a domestic corporation by Savannah, 690.

imposition, under Code Pub. Gen. Laws Md.

see

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

art. 81, of personal liability for taxes on his

CONTRACTS. stock.--Corry v. City of Baltimore, 297.

Lack of any provision for notice to nonresi- Impairing obligation, see "Constitutional Law,” dent stockholder in domestic corporation of as- $ 4. sessment of taxes on his stock held not to ren- Interference with freedom to contract, der invalid, as denying due process of law, so "Constitutional Law," § 3. much of Code Pub. Gen. Laws Md. art. 81, as Operation and effect of customs or usages, see imposes on him as a condition of such owner- *Customs and Usages.” ship a personal liability for taxes on stock.Corry v. City of Baltimore, 297.

Contracts of particular classes of parties. Due process of law is not denied a foreign in- Connecting carriers, see "Carriers," $ 1. surance company by distraining its personal property under authority of Rev. St. Ohio, $ Contracts relating to particular subjects. 1095, to satisfy personal taxes.-Scottish Union See “Interest”; “Patents,” ş 1. & National Ins. Co. v. Bowland, 345; Bowland v. Scottish Union & National Ins. Co., Id.

Carrying mails, see "Post Office," $ 1. Property of a foreign corporation manufac- Public water supply, see "Waters and Water

Courses." turing products of cotton seed is not taken To monopolize trade, see “Monopolies,". § 2. without due process of law by the Texas anti- Transportation of goods, see “Carriers,” trust act, on forfeiture of its license to do busi- Use of patent, see "United States," $ 2. ness for violating those laws.-National Cotton Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern Cotton

Particular classes of express contracts. Oil Co. v. Same, 383.

See "Indemnity"; "Insurance”; “Sales." A state police officer can arrest, on requisi. Stipulations in actions, see "Stipulations." tion of a foreign consul, a seaman charged with insubordination, under treaty provision.- Particular classes of implied contracts. Dallemagne v. Moisan, 422.

See "Contribution." Constitutional guaranty of due process of law held not infringed by Act Aug. 18, 1894, c. 301, Particular modes of discharging contracts. § 1, 28 Stat. 372, 390 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, See “Accord and Satisfaction”; “Compromise p. 1303], making decision of department on

and Settlement"; "Release." right of Chinese to enter United States conclusive on federal courts, in absence of any abuse § 1. Requisites and validity, of authority.-United States v. Ju Toy, 644.

The rule that property delivered under an ilIncluding in the appraisement of capital stock legal contract cannot be recovered back prevents of a domestic corporation for taxation, under the original stockholders in two competing inLaws Pa. 1891, p. 229, the value of coal mined terstate railroads from reclaiming specific shares within the state, but situated in other states, of stock, which they delivered to the stockholdheld to deprive the corporation of its property ing corporation pursuant to a combination subwithout due process of law:-Delaware, L. & sequently adjudged illegal.-Harriman v. NorthW. R. Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, ern Securities Co., 493. 669. Street railway company held not denied due Anti-Trust Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209

Parties to a transaction adjudged to violate process of law in valuation of a franchise under Laws N. Y. 1899, c. 712, on theory that it [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200], heid not exempt was ascertained by speculation. People of from the doctrine in pari delicto.—Harriman v. —

v State of New York v. State Board of Tas Northern Securities Co., 493. Com'rs, 713, 715.

Contracts with telegraph companies, by which Due process of law clause of fourteenth Chicago Board of Trade limits the communicaamendment held not to wholly deprive a state tion of quotations of prices on sales for future of its power to confer jurisdiction on its courts delivery which it might have refrained from to administer assets of absentees.-Cunnius v. communicating to any one, held not a monopReading School Dist., 721.

oly or contract in restraint of trade, either unFixing period of person's absence from his der Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 (U. Fixing period of person's absence from his S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200], or at common law.

[ last domicile which would be sufficient under --Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. Christie Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, to authorize adminis-Grain & Stock Co., 637; L. A. Kinsey Co. v.

. tration of his property, held not so unreasonable Board of Trade of City of Chicago, Id. as not to be due process of law.-Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.

8 2. Construction and operation. Safeguards for protection of property of ab- References in contract for street lighting to sentee in case of his return afforded by Laws sums to be paid in currency held not to overPa. 1885, p. 155, providing a special proceeding throw evidence that current foreign money was for administration of assets of absentees, held to be the medium of payment.-City of San to satisfy requirement of due process of law. Juan v. St. John's Gas Co., 108. -Cunnius v. Reading School Dist., 721.

Notice by publication of special proceedings under Laws Pa. 1885, p. 155, for adminis

CONTRIBUTION. tration of assets of absentees, held due process of law.-Cunnius v. Reading School Dist.,

Terninal company whose negligence in fail721.

ing to discover a defective brake on a car delivA municipal ordinance making it unlawful ered to it has been established by a competent to visit a barred room where gambling imple tribunal cannot enforce contribution from the ments are exhibited held not to deprive any railroad company for the latter's neglect of duty. one of his liberty without due process of law. -Union Stock Yards Co. of Omaha v. Chicago, -Ah Sin v. Wittman, 756.

B. & Q. R. Co., 226.

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

CORPORATIONS.

Service of subpæna on resident treasurer of

foreign corporation held insufficient to give juDue process of law as regards taxation, see risdiction over such corporation.—Kendall v. "Constitutional Law," $ 7.

American Automatic Loom Co., 768. Due process of law as to taxation, see “Constitutional Law," $ 7.

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

In federal courts, see "Courts," 8 5. Forfeiture of license of foreign corporation as

denial of equal protection of laws, see “Con-
stitutional Law," $ 6.

COUNTIES.
Jurisdiction of federal courts, see "Courts," § 4.
Liability of stockholders in national bank, see

See "Municipal Corporations." “Banks and Banking," 1.

Adoption by United States courts of state laws Restraining enforcement of taxes, see "Injunc- as rules of decision, see "Courts," $ 6.

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

COURTS. $ 1. Taxation, see “Taxation,” $$ 2, 3.

Conclusiveness of finding of Land Department, Particular classes of corporations.

see “Public Lands,”. § 2.

Courts-martial, see See "Exchanges”?; "Municipal Corporations."

Army and Navy."

Jurisdiction over foreign insurance company, Insurance companies, see “Insurance," § 1. see "Insurance," 8 1. Telegraph and telephone companies, see "Tele- Removal of action from state court to United graphs and Telephones," § 1.

States court, see “Removal of Causes." Water companies, see "Waters and Water Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error." Courses," § 1.

Jurisdiction of particular actions, proceedings. § 1. Members and stockholders.

or subjects. Stockholders' liability in an Ohio corporation Criminal prosecutions, see “Criminal Law," $ 1. cannot be enforced outside of that state, under Determination of right to property of bankrupt, Const. Ohio, art. 13, § 3, where an action in see "Bankruptcy," $ 2. Ohio courts is alone contemplated by Rev. St. Ohio 1880, § 3260, as amended in 1894.—Mid- Special jurisdictions and proceedings therein. dletown Nat. Bank v. Toledo, A. A. & N. M. Ry. Appellate jurisdiction, see "Bankruptcy,” g 4. Co., 462.

§ 1. Establishment, organization, and § 2. Consolidation.

procedure in general. Laches and acquiescence held to defeat any Federal Supreme Court held not bound on right of the original stockholders in two com question of jurisdiction by a prior case in peting interstate railway companies to rescind which jurisdiction was entertained without sugthe contract under which they delivered their gestion as to the want of it.—New v. Territory stock to a corporation formed in pursuance of a of Oklahoma, 68. combination, under which it would acquire a controlling interest in the capital stock of the Tex. May 25, 1899, as removing discriminatory

Construction given by state courts to Act railway companies in exchange for its own capo features of prior anti-trust laws, held conclu

, ital stock.-Harriman v. Northern Securities Co., 493.

sive on federal Supreme Court.-National Cot

ton Oil Co. v. State of Texas, 379; Southern A clear preponderance of proof held essential Cotton Oil Co. v. Same, 383. to establish that the parties to a transaction by which a corporation acquired, in exchange for $ 2. United States courts - Jurisdiction

a its own capital stock, a controlling interest in

and powers in general. two competing interstate railways, agreed that Inequality in valuation for taxation of a the new corporation should hold such stock as franchise held not ground for injunction in the trustee, where the transaction on its face was federal court, when not made on such a differone of sale.—Harriman v. Northern Securities ent scale of value as to deny the equal protecCo., 493.

tion of the law guarantied by Const. U. S.

Amend. 14.-Coulter v. Louisville & N. R. Co. 8 3. Foreign corporations.

342. Ownership of land in New Mexico by railroad organized and existing under Act Cong. March 3,

Value of matter in dispute, in suit to set aside 1897, c. 374, 26 Stat. 622, held insufficient, un judgment of probate court as fraudulently obder Comp. Laws N. M. 1897, $ 450, to authorize tained, is the aggregate amount of claims whose service on its president, passing through the ter- allowance was procured in furtherance of an

unlawful combination.-McDaniel v. Traylor, ritory on a railroad train, in a personal action

369. in which a judgment may be levied on the lands to satisfy the judgment.-Territory of New Jurisdiction of bills seeking to distribute to Mexico v. Baker, 375.

persons entitled the proceeds of a sale of lands Service of summons on a director of a for- to the United States cannot be entertained by eign corporation casually within the state held a federal court.—Stillman v. Combe, 480. to confer no jurisdiction on the federal court, In cases over which the Supreme Court of where the corporation is doing no business and the United States possesses neither original nor has no property in the state. - Remington v. appellate jurisdiction, it cannot grant prohibiCentral Pac. R. Co., 577.

tion, mandamus, or certiorari as ancillary thereLocal correspondents of foreign corporation, to: -In re Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

512. furnishing them with market quotations, held agents for purpose of service of process. The question of the jurisdiction of a federal Board of Trade of City of Chicago y. Ham- Circuit Court, based on diversity of citizenship, mond Elevator Co., 740.

may be raised by a motion to dismiss on proofs

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

30.

[ocr errors]

taken by the master.-Steigleder v. McQuesten, sued in the federal courts as a citizen of that 616.

state, after compliance with statutory require

ments.-W. L. Wells Co. v. Gastonia Cotton $ 3.

-- Jurisdiction dependent on na- Mfg. Co., 640.

ture of subject matter. The formal repudiation by a city of its con- $ 5. Procedure, and adoption of tract with a waterworks company cannot give

practice of state courts. rise to a suit under the federal Constitution, A Circuit Court of Appeals cannot, without of which a federal court can take jurisdiction statutory authority, permit prosecution

,

in without reference to citizenship.-City of Daw- forma pauperis of a writ of error sued out of son v. Columbia Ave. Sav. Fund, Safe Deposit, that court.-Bradford v. Southern Ry. Co., 55. Title & Trust Co., 420.

Right to prosecute writ of error from a CirAssertion that, because real estate cannot be cuit Court of Appeals without security for devised by nuncupative will, attempt of probate costs held not given by Act July 20, 1892, c. court to exert authority over such real estate 209, 27 Stat. 252 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 706]. by admitting such will to probate deprived -Bradford v. Southern Ry. Co., 55. heirs of property without due process of law, held not to give federal Circuit Court jurisdic- $ 6. State laws as rules of decision. tion to construe the will.—O’Callaghan v. State tax levy on land conveyed by the UnitO'Brien, 727.

ed States to a corporation for dry dock purContention that state court, in admitting a

poses, with the reserved right in grantor to the

use of the dock, held to create a lien on the nuncupative will to probate without giving statutory notice to next of kin, violated due pro- building & Dry Dock Co. v. City of Baltimore,

company's interest alone.—Baltimore Shipcess of law clause of Constitution, held so lacking in merit as to afford no basis for jurisdiction of federal Circuit Court in a suit The meaning of a state statute, as determined to set aside the probate.-O'Callaghan

probate.—O’Callaghan v. by the highest court of the state, concludes the O'Brien, 727.

federal Supreme Court on writ of error.-

Smiley v. State of Kansas, 289. 8 4.

Jurisdiction dependent on citizenship, residence, or character

Whether chattel mortgage covering after-acof parties,

quired property is valid held a local question, on Allegation in complaint held not sufficiently to which decisions of state courts will be followed aver that defendant corporation is an Ohio cor- by the federal Supreme Court.—Thompson v. poration, within the rule imputing to members Fairbanks, 306. of a corporation citizenship in the state creating Decision of California Supreme Court that it. Thomas v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State the repeal by Act Cal. March 23, 1901, of auUniversity, 24.

thority of municipal bodies to license for reveJurisdiction of a federal Circuit Court on the nue abates a suit to recover a license tax, held ground of diverse citizenship over suit between under the decisions of that court a revenue a citizen of Michigan and the board of trus- measure, to be so construed in federal courts.tees of the Ohio State University will sufficient- Flanigan v. Sierra County, 314; Wheeler v. ly appear, without bringing the persons consti- Plumas County, 316. tuting the board before the court as defendants. Validity under state laws of an ordinance of

-Thomas v. Board of Trustees of Ohio State county supervisors is, as to the federal courts, University, 24.

governed by decisions of the highest courts of Federal Circuit Court, whose action was in- | the state.-Flanigan v. Sierra County, 314; voked by the Republic of Colombia to set aside Wheeler v. Plumas County, 316. an award against it in arbitration proceedings, Whether relation of physician and patient exhas power to award interest from the date fixed cluded the former's testimony, under Code Civ. for payment.—Ex parte Republic of Colombia, Proc. N. Y. 88 834, 836, involves question of 107.

state statute, on which decisions of highest That ultimate interest in corporate defend-state court will be accepted by the Supreme ant may be the same as that of complaining Court of the United States.-Supreme Lodge, stockholders does not, in determining jurisdic- K. P., v. Meyer, 754. tion of federal court invoked for diverse citi- § 7. Supreme court in general. zenship, require such corporation to be grouped The jurisdiction of a federal Circuit Court on the side of complainants.-Doctor v. Har- over a controversy between citizens of different rington, 355.

states, claiming under grants from different Presumption that stockholders of corporation states, held to depend entirely on diversity of are citizens of the state which created it held citizenship, within rule making decrees of Cirnot to preclude them from asserting their ac- cuit Court of Appeals final in such cases.tual citizenship to sustain jurisdiction in fed- Stevenson v. Fain, 6. eral court to suit by them as stockholders.

Review in Supreme Court of final judgments Doctor v. Harrington, 355.

of the District Court of the United States for A federal Circuit Court has no jurisdiction, the District of Porto Rico held not necessarily because of diversity of citizenship, of a suit confined by Act April 12, 1900, c. 191, $ 35, 31 against a city by the mortgagee of a water- Stat. 77, 85, to cases therein described.-Ama. works company to enforce the city's contract do v. United States, 13. with that company, where there is no diver- The claim in a written motion in arrest of sity of citizenship between the city and the judgment that the indictment did not set forth company.-City of Dawson v. Columbia Ave. Offense under the statutes of the United States Sav. Fund, Safe Deposit, Title & Trust Co., held too indefinite to give the Supreme Court 420.

jurisdiction of a writ of error to the District Incorporators under a charter declaring that Court of the United States for the District of they have been created a body politic and cor- Porto Rico, under Act April 12, 1900, c. 191, $ porate become a corporation under the laws of 35, 31 Stat. 77, 85, as a case where the ConMississippi, for the purpose of suing and being stitution of the United States or an act of

25 s.0.52

« AnteriorContinuar »