AGRICULTURAL CO. v. PIERCE COUNTY, 73 U.S. 246 (1867)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

AGRICULTURAL CO. v. PIERCE COUNTY, 73 U.S. 246 (1867)

73 U.S. 246 (Wall.)

AGRICULTURAL COMPANY
v.
PIERCE COUNTY.

December Term, 1867

ERROR to the Supreme Court of Washington Territory.

The writ of error bore date January 20th, 1862. It was on its face made returnable on the second Monday of December next after its date, when it should have been the first Monday of that month, which is by law the day on which the terms of this court commence each year.

For this cause (Mr. Justice MILLER, announcing the order), the writ of error was dismissed under the authority of the cases of Carroll v. Dorsey,1Insurance Company v. Mordecai,2 and Porter v. Foley,3 heretofore decided by this court.

Messrs. Lander and Carlisle, for the plaintiff in error; no o posite counsel appearing nor having entered their appearance of record.

Footnotes

Footnote 1 20 Howard, 204.

Footnote 2 21 Id. 195.

Footnote 3 Id. 393.[ Agricultural Co. v. Pierce County

Footnote 73 U.S. 246 (1867) ]




U.S. Supreme Court

AGRICULTURAL CO. v. PIERCE COUNTY, 73 U.S. 246 (1867)

73 U.S. 246 (Wall.)

AGRICULTURAL COMPANY
v.
PIERCE COUNTY.

December Term, 1867

ERROR to the Supreme Court of Washington Territory.

The writ of error bore date January 20th, 1862. It was on its face made returnable on the second Monday of December next after its date, when it should have been the first Monday of that month, which is by law the day on which the terms of this court commence each year.

For this cause (Mr. Justice MILLER, announcing the order), the writ of error was dismissed under the authority of the cases of Carroll v. Dorsey,1Insurance Company v. Mordecai,2 and Porter v. Foley,3 heretofore decided by this court.

Messrs. Lander and Carlisle, for the plaintiff in error; no o posite counsel appearing nor having entered their appearance of record.

Footnotes

Footnote 1 20 Howard, 204.

Footnote 2 21 Id. 195.

Footnote 3 Id. 393.[ Agricultural Co. v. Pierce County

Footnote 73 U.S. 246 (1867) ]

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.

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.