Cardona v. Quinones,
240 U.S. 83 (1916)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Cardona v. Quinones, 240 U.S. 83 (1916)

Cardona v. Quinones

No. 185

Submitted January 18, 1916

Decided February 21, 1916

240 U.S. 83


Where the appeal is prayed within the statutory time, the mere date of its allowance by the court is not controlling. United States v. Vigil, 10 Wall. 423.

Where the record in an appeal from the Supreme Court of Porto Rico contains a statement of fact prepared by the court below, and there is an entire absence of evidence, except as contained in such statement and the opinion, this Court can only dispose of the legal propositions in the light of the facts as so shown and elucidated.

It is the settled doctrine of the Court not to disturb, but, in the absence of clear error, to uphold, the action of the court below as to matters concerning purely local law.

Both courts below having, in an action to recover real estate in Porto Rico, upheld the ten-year prescription under the code, and also having found that appellant was not a third person entitled as such to the benefits of the recording provisions of the Mortgage Law, this Court affirms the judgment.

20 Porto Rico 421 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the jurisdiction and practice of this Court in appeals from judgments of the Supreme Court of Porto Rico and the validity of a judgment of that court, are stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: 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.