SEIBERT V. UNITED STATES EX REL. HARSHMAN, 129 U. S. 192 (1889)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 129 U. S. 192
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/129/192/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/129/192/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Seibert v. United States ex Rel. Harshman, 129 U.S. 192 (1889)
Seibert v. United States ex Rel. Harshman
No. 130
Submitted December 18, 1889
Decided January 21, 1889
129 U.S. 192
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
Syllabus
Siebert v. Lewis, 122 U. S. 284, was very carefully and elaborately considered, and is adhered to.
The case is stated in the opinion.
MR. JUSTICE FIELD delivered the opinion of the Court.
The facts of this case are similar to those in Seibert v. Lewis, before the Court at its October term, 1886, 122 U. S. 284, and it is admitted by the counsel for the plaintiff in error that the decision there, if adhered to, will control here. He, however, asks us to reconsider our rulings and reverse our former judgment. We see no reason to justify such reconsideration and change of position. The very elaborate argument of counsel is but a re-presentation of the reasons originally offered against the decision in that and analogous cases. Seibert v. Lewis was very carefully and elaborately considered, and to the doctrines there announced we adhere. Upon its authority,
The judgment of the court below must be affirmed.