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/152/87/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/152/87/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Rowe v. Phelps, 152 U.S. 87 (1894)
Rowe v. Phelps
No. 237
Argued and submitted February 1, 1894
Decided March 5, 1894
152 U.S. 87
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Syllabus
There being no assignment of errors, as required by Rev.Stat. § 997, and no specification of errors required by Rule 21, this case is dismissed.
This was, as in the preceding case, an action by the defendant in error to recover the rental value of certain sections of land alleged to have been depastured by the plaintiffs in error, constituting the firm of Rowe Bros.
Upon the trial of the case, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $7,739, for which judgment was entered, and defendant sued out this writ of error.
MR. JUSTICE BROWN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the Court.
There is no assignment of errors sent up with the record in this case, as required by Rev.Stat. § 997, and no "specification of the errors relied upon," as required by Rule 21 of this Court. This rule requires that the specification "shall set out separately and particularly each error assigned and intended to be urged," and there is no such "plain error not assigned or specified" as calls upon the Court to exercise its option to review the questions involved. It would seem that unless the statute and rule are to be entirely disregarded, this writ of error must be
Dismissed.
