Fayolle v. Texas Pac Ry Co

Decision Date06 February 1888
Citation31 L.Ed. 533,124 U.S. 519,8 S.Ct. 588
PartiesFAYOLLE et al. v. TEXAS PAC. RY. CO
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

[Statement of Case from pages 519-522 intentionally omitted] W. D. Davidge and William H. Trescott, for motion.

W. D. Shipman, opposed.

WAITE, C. J.

This motion is granted. The decree was rendered November 12, 1883. An appeal was taken at the same time in open court, returnable to our October term, 1884, which ended May 4, 1885, but it was not docketed here until January 17, 1886. That was too late, as the appeal had become inoperative through the failure of the appellants to docket the case here at the return-term. Grigsby v. Purcell, 99 U. S. 505, and cases there cited; Killian v. Clark, 111 U. S. 784, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 700; Caillot v. Deetken, 113 U. S.; 215, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 432. The excuse presented for the failure to docket in time is not sufficient to give the appellants the benefit of any exception to this rule, which was recognized in Grigsby v. Purcell, 507. Neither does the case come within that of Edwards U. S., 102 U. S. 575, because the transcript of the record was not lodged in the office of the clerk of this court until after the return-term of the appeal, and no attempt was made to get it upon the docket until another term had passed and still another had begun. Dismissed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Freeman v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • August 25, 1915
    ... ... 170, 174, 9 Sup.Ct. 269, 32 ... L.Ed. 651 (1889); Norton v. Commissioners, etc., 129 ... U.S. 505, 9 Sup.Ct. 331, 32 L.Ed. 784 (1889); Fayolle v ... Texas & Pacific R. Co., 124 U.S. 519, 8 Sup.Ct. 588, 31 ... L.Ed. 533 (1888); Radford v. Folsom, 123 U.S. 725, 8 ... Sup.Ct. 334, 31 ... ...
  • Carriere & Son v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • April 1, 1908
    ... ... Scarborough v. Pargoud, ... supra; Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Colorado Eastern ... Railway Company, 54 F. 22, 4 C.C.A. 161; Fayolle v ... Texas & Pacific Railway Company, 124 U.S. 519, 8 Sup.Ct ... 588, 31 L.Ed. 533; Old Nick Williams Company v. United ... States, 152 F. 925, ... ...
  • Walter A. Wood Harvester Co. v. Heidel
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • December 22, 1894
    ... ... Grigsby v. Purcell, 99 U.S. 505, 25 L.Ed ... 354; Richardson v. Green, 130 U.S. 104, 9 ... S.Ct. 443, 32 L.Ed. 872; Fayolle v. Railroad ... Co., 124 U.S. 519, 8 S.Ct. 588, 31 L.Ed. 533; ... Spoore v. Fannan, 16 N.Y. 620; ... Smith v. Solomon, 84 Cal. 537, 24 P. 286; ... ...
  • Walter A. Wood Harvester Co. v. Heidel
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • December 22, 1894
    ...case for reinstatement was made. Grigsby v. Purcell, 99 U. S. 505;Richardson v. Green, 130 U. S. 104, 9 Sup. Ct. 443;Fayolle v. Railroad Co., 124 U. S. 519, 8 Sup. Ct. 588;Spoore v. Fannan, 16 N. Y. 620;Smith v. Solomon (Cal.) 24 Pac. 286;Tile Works v. Hall (Neb.) 44 N. W. 45. The motions a......
  • 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