City Bank of Fort Worth v. Hunter
152 U.S. 512 (1894)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

City Bank of Fort Worth v. Hunter, 152 U.S. 512 (1894)

City Bank of Fort Worth v. Hunter

No. 264

Submitted March 8, 1894

Decided March 19, 1894

152 U.S. 512

Syllabus

Compliance with a mandate of this Court which leaves nothing to the judgment or discretion of the court below may be enforced by mandamus. This Court cannot entertain an appeal from a judgment executing its mandate if the value of the matter in dispute upon the appeal is less than $5,000.

No appeal lies from a decree for costs.

In City National Bank of Fort Worth v. Hunter,129 U. S. 557, 129 U. S. 5796, will be found a full history of the litigation between the parties to the present appeal. The final decree was reversed, with costs, and the case was remanded, with directions to proceed in conformity with the opinion of this Court. After the mandate and opinion of this Court had been filed in the court below, the cause was again heard, and it was, among other things, adjudged:

"That said complainants, R. D. Hunter, A. G. Evans, and R. P. Buel, do have and recover of and from the defendants, the City National Bank of Fort Worth, the sum of twelve thousand nine hundred and eighty-four and 85/100 (12,984.85) dollars, together with interest thereon from this date at the rate of eight percent per annum. It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that all costs accrued in this cause up to September 30, 1881, be, and the same are hereby, adjudged against said complainants, R. D. Hunter, A. G. Evans, and R. P. Buel, and for which let

Page 152 U. S. 513

execution issue; and, as the costs of the Supreme Court have been allowed against said complainants, all other costs incurred herein, which have not been otherwise adjudged, be, and the same are hereby, adjudged against said defendant, the City National Bank of Fort Worth."

From this decree the present appeal was prosecuted by the bank. The errors assigned are: 1. the court gave interest on the plaintiffs' portion of the fund to be divided; 2. costs were awarded against the defendant bank.

Page 152 U. S. 514

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw 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.