Seibert v. United States ex Rel. Harshman, 129 U.S. 192 (1889)
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
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.
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
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.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.
