Page images
PDF
EPUB

Rodney, Attorney-General.

SALLY

THE • S

No appeal lies from that court directly to this in a case where that court acts in the capacity of a tion, does not district court. In such cases the appeal is expressly lie directly to given to the circuit court for the district of Massa- the supreme chusetts.

court of the United States, but to the circuit court for

In all cases

Maine acts as

to the circuit

of

Massachusetts.

By the 10th-section of the judiciary act of 1789, the district of vol. 1. p. 54. it is enacted that the "district court Masschusetts. in Maine district, shall, besides the jurisdiction herein where the dis before granted, have jurisdiction of all causes (ex- trict court of cept of appeals and writs of error) herein after a district court, made cognisable in a circuit court, and shall pro- the appeal is ceed therein, in the same manner as a circuit court; court for the and writs of error shall lie from decisions therein, district to the circuit court in the district of Massachusetts, in the same manner as from other district courts to their respective circuit courts." And by the 21st section it is enacted, "that from final decrees in adistrict court in causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, where the matter in dispute exceeds the sum or value of three hundred dollars, exclusive of costs, an appeal shall be allowed to the next circuit court to be held in such district. Provided nevertheless, that all such appeals from final decrees as aforesaid, from the district court of Maine, shall be made to the circuit court, next to be holden after each appeal, in the district of Massachusetts."

By the act of March 3d, 1803, vol. 6. p. 315. § 2. it is enacted, "that from all final judgments or decrees rendered or to be rendered in any circuit court, or in any district court, acting as a circuit court, in any cases of equity, of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, and of prize or no prize, an appeal, where the matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, shall exceed the sum or value of two thousand dollars, shall be allowed to the supreme court of the United States," &c.

In this case the court below could only act in its capacity of a district court, because such causes of

SALLY

Y.

admiralty and maritime jurisdiction are exclusively THE U. S. Cognisable in a district court.

C. Lee, contra, contended, that there was a repugnance between the act of 1789, and that of 1803, the latter declaring that appeals in such cases should be directly to the supreme court.

But the Court was of opinion that this not being a case where the district court was acting as a circuit court, the appeal ought to have been to the circuit court of Massachusetts.

Appeal dismissed.

[blocks in formation]

2. In admiralty cases, an appeal sus-
pends the sentence altogether;
and the cause is to be heard in the
appellate court as if no sentence
had been pronounced. Yeaton et
al. v. United States,
281

3. If the law, under which the sen-
tence of condemnation was pro-
nounced, expire after sentence in
the court below, and before final
sentence in the appellate court, no
sentence of condemnation can be
pronounced, unless some special
provision be made, for that pur-
pose, by statute. Id.

ib.
4. If errors appear upon the face
of the report of auditors, it is not
necessary to except. Himely v.
Rose,
$13

5. If the property ordered to be re-
stored, be sold, interest is not to
be paid. Id.
ib.
373

6. See Jurisdiction, 1. 17.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

2. The Bank of the United States de-
rived no authority from its charter
to sue in the courts of the United
States. Bank of The United States
v. Deveaux.

BANKRUPT.

62

1. Under the bankrupt law of the Uni-
ted States, a joint debt may be set
off against the separate claim of the
assignee of one of the partners;
but such set-off could not have
been made at law, independently
of the bankrupt law. Tucker v.
Oxley,
34
2. A joint debt may be proved under
a separate commission, and a full
dividend received. It is equity
alone which can restrain the joint
creditor from receiving his full di-
vidend until the joint effects are
exhausted. Id.
S. In distributing the effects of a

35

[blocks in formation]

2.

1.

a feme sole, intermarries, after the
judgment, and before the service
of the writ of error, the service of
the citation upon the husband is
suflicient. Fairfax v. Fairfax, 19
The court will not compel a cause
to be heard, unless the citation be
served 30 days before the first day
of the term. Welch.v. Mandeville
321

CITIZEN.

A corporation aggregate cannot be
a citizen, and cannot litigate in the
courts of the United States un-
less in consequence of the cha-
racter of the individuals who
compose the body politic, which
character must appear, by proper
averments, upon the record. The
Hope In. Co. v. Boardman, 57
Bank of United States v. Deveaux, 62
A corporation aggregate, composed
of citizens of one state, may sue
a citizen of another state in the
circuit court of the United States.
Bank of United States v. Deveaux, 61
3. See Jurisdiction, 13.
303

2.

CONSIDERATION.

1. In a suit against the endorsor of a
promissory note, who endorsed to
give credit to the maker, the con-
Lideration moving from the en-
dorsee to the maker, upon the cre-
dit of the endorsor, is a good con-
sideration to support the assumpsie
against the endorsor. Yeaton v.
Bank of Alexandria,

49
2. To constitute a consideration, it is
not necessary that a benefit should
accrue to the promissor; it is suf-
ficient that something valuable
flows from the promissee, and that
the promise is the inducement to
the transaction. Violett v. Patton,
142
3. Under the statute of frauds of Vir-
ginia it is not necessary that the
consideration should be expressed
in writing. That statute only re-
quires the promise to be in wri
ting. Id.
ib.
4 The endorsement of a promissory

« PreviousContinue »