Ballance v. Forsyth - 65 U.S. 183 (1860)


U.S. Supreme Court

Ballance v. Forsyth, 65 U.S. 24 How. 183 183 (1860)

Ballance v. Forsyth

65 U.S. (24 How.) 183

Syllabus

After the mandate went down to the circuit court, in the ease of Ballance v. Forsyth, 13 How. 18, Ballance filed a bill upon the equity side of the court setting forth the same titles which were involved in the suit at law, and praying relief.

Page 65 U. S. 184

It was not allowable for him to appeal from the judgment of the circuit court and supreme court to a court of chancery, upon the merits of the legal titles involved in the controversy they had adjudicated.

The objections to the title of his adversary should have been urged upon the trial of the suit at law, and if they are founded upon alleged errors in the location and survey, all such questions are administrative in their character, and must be disposed of in the Land Office. He ought to have made opposition there; if he did not, he is concluded by his laches.

In the record there is a paper purporting to be an amended bill. It is doubtful whether this was properly filed, and if it was, it presents no ground of relief.

This was a sequel to the case of Ballance v. Forsyth, reported in 13 How. 18. After the mandate went down from this Court, Ballance filed a bill on the equity side of the court, setting forth the same titles that were involved in the suit at law, and praying relief upon certain special grounds, which it is not necessary to enumerate.



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.