Alfred Tracy, Surviving Partner of Edward Tracy, Plaintiff In Error v. William Holcombe
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | TANEY |
| Citation | 65 U.S. 426,16 L.Ed. 742,24 How. 426 |
| Parties | ALFRED TRACY, SURVIVING PARTNER OF EDWARD TRACY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM HOLCOMBE |
| Decision Date | 01 December 1860 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
9 practice notes
-
Morgan v. Thompson, 1,862.
...3, 1 Sup.Ct. 15, 27 L.Ed. 73; Brown v. Union Bank, 4 How. 465, 11 L.Ed. 1058; Pepper v. Dunlap, 5 How. 51, 12 L.Ed. 46; Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L.Ed. 742; McComb v. Commissioners of Knox Co., 91 U.S. 1, 23 L.Ed. 85; Baker v. White, 92 U.S. 176, 23 L.Ed. 480; Davis v. Crouch, 94 U......
-
United States v. Paul Beatty, 555
...indicated. It is therefore essentially interlocutory, and cannot be the subject of a writ of error from this court. Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L. ed. 742; Macfarland v. Brown, 187 U. S. 239, 47 L. ed. 159, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 105; United States v. Krall, 174 U. S. 385, 43 L. ed. 1017, ......
-
Seward Haseltine v. Central National Bank, 62
...upon the authority of Brown v. Union Bank, 4 How. 465, 11 L. ed. 1058; Pepper v. Dunlap, 5 How. 51, 12 L. ed. 46; Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L. ed. 742; Moore v. Robbins, 18 Wall. 588, 21 L. ed. 758; St. Clair County v. Lovingston, 18 Wall. 628, 21 L. ed. 813; Parcels v. Johnson, 20......
-
Grazia v. Anderson., No. 587.
...MacFarland v. Brown, 187 U.S. 239, 23 S.Ct. 105, 47 L.Ed. 159; Hume v. Bowie, 148 U.S. 245, 13 S.Ct. 582, 37 L.Ed. 438; Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L.Ed. 742; East Erie Commercial R. Co. v. Denial, 3 Cir., 66 F.2d 555; Sentinel Co. v. Dinwiddie, 7 Cir., 41 F.2d 57; Wright v. Taft-Pie......
Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
-
Morgan v. Thompson, 1,862.
...3, 1 Sup.Ct. 15, 27 L.Ed. 73; Brown v. Union Bank, 4 How. 465, 11 L.Ed. 1058; Pepper v. Dunlap, 5 How. 51, 12 L.Ed. 46; Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L.Ed. 742; McComb v. Commissioners of Knox Co., 91 U.S. 1, 23 L.Ed. 85; Baker v. White, 92 U.S. 176, 23 L.Ed. 480; Davis v. Crouch, 94 U......
-
United States v. Paul Beatty, 555
...indicated. It is therefore essentially interlocutory, and cannot be the subject of a writ of error from this court. Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L. ed. 742; Macfarland v. Brown, 187 U. S. 239, 47 L. ed. 159, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 105; United States v. Krall, 174 U. S. 385, 43 L. ed. 1017, ......
-
Seward Haseltine v. Central National Bank, 62
...upon the authority of Brown v. Union Bank, 4 How. 465, 11 L. ed. 1058; Pepper v. Dunlap, 5 How. 51, 12 L. ed. 46; Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426, 16 L. ed. 742; Moore v. Robbins, 18 Wall. 588, 21 L. ed. 758; St. Clair County v. Lovingston, 18 Wall. 628, 21 L. ed. 813; Parcels v. Johnson, 20......
-
Bostwick v. Brinkerhoff
...the court below cannot be brought here on writ of error. Brown v. Union Bank, 4 How. 466; Pepper v. Dunlap, 5 How. 51; Tracy v. Holcombe, 24 How. 426; Moore v. Robbins, 18 Wall. 588; McComb v. Knox Co. 91 U. S. 1; Baker v. White, 92 U. S. 176; Davis v. Crouch, 94 U. S. 514. This clearly is ......
Request a trial to view additional results