Ex parte Hagar
Decision Date | 01 October 1881 |
Parties | EX PARTE HAGAR |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
PETITION for a writ of prohibition.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
The case was argued by Mr. Henry G. Ward and Mr. Richard E. McMurtrie for the petitioner, and by Mr. Edward G. Bradford and Mr. Thomas F. Bayard, contra.
To continue reading
Request your trial12 cases
-
The City of Norwalk
...13 Blatchf. 519;) fifth, actions for half pilotage where a pilot's services were refused, (Ex parte McNiel, 13 Wall. 236, and Ex parte Hagar, 104 U.S. 520, Cooley v. Port Wardens, supra;) sixth, liens for expenses of seamen at a quarantine hospital, (The Wensleydale, 41 F. 829;) seventh, re......
-
The Queen
...in the statute. Courts of admiralty have undoubted jurisdiction of all marine contracts and torts.' In the case of Ex parte Hagar, 104 U.S. 520, 26 L.Ed. 816, the court denied an application for a writ of prohibition to restrain the District Court for the District of Delaware, sitting in ad......
-
Muir v. Chatfield
... ... 512, 49 L.Ed ... 845. See, also, Virginia v. Rives, 100 U.S. 313, 25 ... L.Ed. 667 ... Note ... that in the cases of Ex parte Easton, 95 U.S. 68, 24 L.Ed ... 373, Ex parte Gordon, 104 U.S. 515, 26 L.Ed. 814, Ex parte ... Ferry Co., 104 U.S. 519, 26 L.Ed. 815, Ex parte ... ...
- Brush Elec. Co. v. California Elec. Light Co.
Request a trial to view additional results