Benites v. Hampton

Decision Date05 December 1887
Citation8 S.Ct. 254,31 L.Ed. 260,123 U.S. 519
PartiesBENITES v. HAMPTON
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

E. D. Hoge, for plaintiff in error.

S. Shellabarger and J. M. Wilson, for defendant in error.

WAITE, C. J.

Section 997 of the Revised Statutes is in these words: 'There shall be annexed to and returned with any writ of error for the removal of a cause, at the day and place therein mentioned, an authenticated transcript of the record, an assignment of errors, and a prayer for reversal, with a citation to the adverse party.' Rule 8, sec. 1, of this court is as follows: 'The clerk of the court to which any writ of error may be directed shall make return of the same, by transmitting a true copy of the record, and of the assignment of errors, under his hand and the seal of the court.' Rule 21 requires printed briefs to be filed, and section 2 of that rule provides that the brief shall contain, 'in the order here stated, (1) a concise abstract, or statement of the case, present- ing succinctly the questions involved and the manner in which they are raised. (2) A specification of the errors relied upon, which, in cases brought up by writ of error, shall set out separately and particularly each error asserted and intended to be urged; and in cases brought up by appeal the specification shall state, as particularly as may be, in what the decree is alleged to be erroneous. When the error alleged is to the admission or to the rejection of evidence, the specification shall quote the full substance of the evidence admitted or rejected. When the error alleged is to the charge of the court, the specification shall set out the part referred to totidem verbis, whether it be instructions given or instructions refused. When the error alleged is to a ruling upon the report of a master, the specification shall state the exception to the report and the action of the court upon it. (3) A brief of the argument, exhibiting a clear statement of the points of law or fact to be discussed, with a reference to the pages of the record and the authorities relied upon in support of each point. When a statute of a state is cited, so much thereof as may be deemed necessary to the decision of the case shall be printed at length.' Sections 4 and 5 of the same rule are as follows: '(4) When there is no assignment of errors, as required by section 997 of the Revised Statutes, counsel will not be heard, except at the request of the court; and errors not specified according to this rule will be disregarded; but...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Hanson v. C. B. & Q. R. R. Company
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • April 2, 1923
    ... ... cases other reasons are also stated for the court's ... action. ( Dugger v. Tayloe, 121 U.S. 286, 30 L.Ed ... 946, 7 S.Ct. 895; Benites v. Hampton, 123 U.S. 519, ... 31 L.Ed. [29 Wyo. 438] 260; Stevens v. Barbour, 140 ... U.S. 48, 35 L.Ed. 338, 11 S.Ct. 690; Rowe v. Phelps, ... ...
  • Gulf Coast Shippers Ltd. v. DHL Express (Usa), Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Utah
    • July 28, 2015
    ...Utah May 8, 2001) (citing Hurd, 106 P.2d at 777). 164. DHL cites to Benites v. Hampton, 3 P. 206 (Utah Terr. 1884), appeal dismissed, 8 S. Ct. 254 (1887). In Benites, the Supreme Court for the Territory of Utah recognized that failure to object to a bill for a specific amount within a reaso......
  • Marshall v. Burtis
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 30, 1899
    ...of testimony, and there is no specification in the briefs, as required by rule 21. Lucas v. Brooks, 18 Wall. 436; Benites v. Hampton, 123 U. S. 519, 8 Sup. Ct. 254. Indeed, error on admitting testimony is not urged at all, and probably was not intended to be. The statement of counsel 'The e......
  • State v. Smith
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • May 15, 1897
    ... ... S.) 71; Ryan v. Koch, 17 Wall. (U. S.) ... 19; Treat v. Jamison, 20 Wall. (U. S.) 652; ... Dugger v. Tayloe, 121 U.S. 286, 7 S.Ct. 895; Benites ... v. Hampton, 123 U.S. 519, 8 S.Ct. 254.) ... QUARLES, ... J. Sullivan, C. J., and Huston, J., concur ... [5 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT