Brown v. Wiley
71 U.S. 165

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Brown v. Wiley, 71 U.S. 4 Wall. 165 165 (1866)

Brown v. Wiley

71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 165

Syllabus

1. Under the Act of March 3, 1863, establishing the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, the action of that court can be examined here in no case in which like action in the circuit court of the district, whose place it supplies, could not be reexamined.

2. Hence, it can be examined only in those cases where there has been a final judgment, order, or decree.

3. The certificate of the finding of a jury on certain issues involving paternity, marriage, and legitimacy, sent from the Orphans' Court to the Supreme Court of the District, which certificate of finding is transmitted

Page 71 U. S. 166

by the Supreme Court to the Orphans' Court, is not such a final judgment, order, or decree as this Court can reexamine on error.

4. Nor where the finding of the jury was at special term held by a single judge of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, under instructions by such judge, and a motion for new trial on exception to such instructions and other grounds has been heard at general term by all the judges and overruled, is such overruling a final judgment, order, or decree, reviewable on writ of error by this Court.

A petition was filed in the Orphans' Court of the District of Columbia by John Wiley and Emily his wife setting forth that the said Emily was the child of Tillotson Brown, deceased and his sole heir and distributee; that her mother, Elizabeth Brown, the widow of the said Tillotson, had duly administered upon his estate; that a surplus was left in her hands from the assets of the estate, and praying that such portion of the same as the petitioner was entitled to might be paid over to her.

Marshall Brown filed an answer to the petition, setting forth that he was the brother of said Tillotson and alleging that the said Tillotson was never married to the said Elizabeth Brown and that if he ever was so married, the petitioner, Emily Wiley, was not his child.

Thereupon the Orphans' Court, on the 10th of February, 1863, sent the following issues to the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia:

1st. Whether the petitioner, Emily Wiley, was the child of the said Tillotson?

2d. Whether the said Tillotson was ever married to the mother of said Emily?

3d. Whether, after the said marriage, the said Tillotson ever acknowledged the said Emily to be his child?

After this -- that is to say March 3, 1863 -- an act of Congress abolished the circuit court and established in its stead the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. [Footnote 1]

The issues were submitted to a jury, at a special term of this Supreme Court, November, A.D. 1865, and a verdict rendered thereon in the affirmative on all the questions.

Page 71 U. S. 167

A motion for a new trial was made, on exceptions taken at the trial, which was heard before all the four judges at a general term of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, in the manner prescribed by the statute constituting the court. [Footnote 2] The motion was overruled, and the cause remanded with directions that the same should be proceeded in according to law.

Thereupon an order was entered by the court before which the issues had been tried directing that the finding of the jury on the issues sent from the Orphans' Court be certified by the clerk to said Orphans' Court.

The writ of error in this case was sued out that the foregoing order might be brought up to this Court.

It is proper here to remark that by the eleventh section of the Act of March 3, 1863, abolishing the Circuit Court of the District and establishing in its stead the Supreme Court,

"Any final judgment, order, or decree of said court may be reexamined and reversed or affirmed in the Supreme Court of the United States upon writ of error or appeal in the same cases and in like manner as is now provided by law in reference to final judgments, orders, or decrees of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia,"

and that in the circuit court referred to, as was provided by the law establishing it (an act of 1801), "any final judgment, order, or decree" wherein the matter in dispute exceeded the value of $100 might "be reexamined, reversed, or affirmed in this Court." It may also be mentioned that by the eighth section of the act of 1863, it is enacted

"That if upon the trial of any cause an exception be taken, . . . it may be stated in writing in a case, or in a bill of exceptions, with so much of the evidence as may be material to the questions to be raised. . . . The justice who tries the cause may in his discretion entertain a motion to set aside a verdict and grant a

Page 71 U. S. 168

new trial, upon exceptions, or for insufficient evidence, or for excessive damages. "

Page 71 U. S. 170

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.