Belknap v. United States
150 U.S. 588 (1893)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Belknap v. United States, 150 U.S. 588 (1893)

Belknap v. United States

No. 90

Argued November 20-21, 1893

Decided December 11, 1893

150 U.S. 588

Syllabus

Ordinarily a court has no power to grant a new trial at a term subsequent to that at which the original judgment was rendered.

The Court of Claims, however, under Rev.Stat. § 1088, has power to grant a new trial in such case on a motion on behalf of the United States, and a mandate from this Court does not affect that power.

When such a motion is made on behalf of the government on the ground that its officers understood that there was an agreement that a case which had been appealed to this Court by the United States, and had been remanded to that court by this Court on the ground that the appellants had not entered it here, was to abide the result in another case appealed from the Court of Claims by the United States and decided here in their favor, the granting of the motion by the Court of Claims mast be taken by this Court as conclusive on the question whether the evidence warranted the action of that court, as that evidence is not preserved.

The payment to an Indian agent of the amount appropriated by Congress for the payment of his salary being less than the amount fixed by general law as the salary of the office, and his receipt of the sum paid "in full of my pay for services for the period herein expressed," is a full satisfaction of the claim.

United States v. Langston,118 U. S. 389, explained and limited.

Page 150 U. S. 589

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.