Durousseau and Others v. the United States
Decision Date | 01 February 1810 |
Citation | 10 U.S. 307,3 L.Ed. 232,6 Cranch 307 |
Parties | DUROUSSEAU AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED STATES |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This is the first of several writs of error to sundry judgments rendered by the court of the United States for the territory of Orleans.
The attorney-general having moved to dismiss them, because no writ of error lies from this court to that in any case, or, if in any case, not in such a case as this; the jurisdiction of this court becomes the first subject for consideration.
The act erecting Louisiana into two territories establishes a district court in the territory of Orleans, consisting of one judge who 'shall, in all things, have and exercise the same jurisdiction and powers which are, by law, given to, or may be exercised by, the judge of Kentucky district.'
On the part of the United States it is contended, that this description of the jurisdiction of the court of New Orleans does not imply a power of revision in this court similar to that which might have been exercised over the judgments of the district court of Kentucky; or, if it does, that a writ of error could not have been sustained to a judgment rendered by the district court of Kentucky, in such a case as this.
On the part of the plaintiffs it is contended, that this court possesses a constitutional power to revise and correct the judgments of inferior courts; or, if not so, that such a power is implied in the act by which the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Thayer
...that the right of appeal shall exist in certain cases denies, by implication, the right to appeal in all other cases. Durousseau v. U. S., 6 Cranch, 312, 3 L. Ed. 232; Ex parte McCardle, 7 Wall. 506, 19 L. Ed. "At common law a writ of error lay as a matter of right in all civil cases follow......
-
Halleck v. Berliner
...issue an appropriate writ to bring before the Court a decision of the special court. While, as a result of Durousseau v. United States, 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 307, 3 L.Ed. 232 (1810), the power of the Supreme Court to issue the extraordinary writs of mandamus or common law certiorari must be fo......
-
Patterson v. State
...removed the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear certain cases in which a party had received a pardon); Durousseau v. United States , 10 U.S. 307, 313, 6 Cranch 307, 3 L.Ed. 232 (1810) (declaring, in a discussion of the extent of the Court's jurisdiction, that "[e]very question originating ......
-
Ex parte France
...every disposition to support the writ of error, they were of opinion they could not take cognizance of the case.” In Durousseau v. U. S., 6 Cranch, 307, 3 L. Ed. 232, in an opinion by John Marshall, C. J., it was held: “This court, therefore, will only review those judgments of the Circuit ......
-
CHAPTER 10 SUCCESSIVE PETITIONS
...and regulated by the [Judiciary Act of 1789], and by such other acts as have been passed on the subject." Durousseau v. United States, 10 U.S. 307 (1810); see also United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805). The Act does remove our authority to entertain an appeal or a petition for a writ of ......
-
Defining the Article Iii Judicial Power: Comparing Congressional Power to Strip Jurisdiction With Congressional Power to Reassign Adjudications
...the Court's appellate and original jurisdiction, not to withdraw jurisdiction altogether. [41]See Clinton, supra note 27, at 775. [42] 10 U.S. 307 (1810). [43] Durousseau v. United States, 10 U.S. 307, 314 (1810) "The appellate powers of this court are not given by the judicial act. They ar......