Oliver Saunders, Plaintiff In Error v. Benjamin Gould
| Decision Date | 01 January 1830 |
| Citation | 29 U.S. 392,4 Pet. 392,7 L.Ed. 897 |
| Parties | OLIVER SAUNDERS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR v. BENJAMIN GOULD |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
THIS case came before the court on a certificate of a division of opinion by the judges of the circuit court for the district of Rhode Island.
It was submitted, without argument, by Mr Coxe for the plaintiff in error, and Mr Whipple for the defendant.
When this case was brought before the court, it was admitted by the counsel to be essentially the same with Gardner vs. Collins, reported in 2 Peters's Rep. 58; but he relied on certain evidences which he exhibited of a settled judicial construction of the act on which the cause depended, different from that which had been made by this court. Had the court been satisfied on this point, that settled construction would undoubtedly have been respected. But the court was not convinced that the construction which prevails in Rhode Island is opposed to that which was made by this court. On communicating this decision to the bar, counsel declined arguing the cause; and a certificate, similar to that which was given in the former case, was about to be prepared: but on inspecting the record, it was perceived that the judges of the circuit court, instead of dividing on one or more points, had divided on the whole cause; and had directed the whole case to be certified to this court. Considering this as irregular, the court directs the cause to be remanded to the circuit court; that further proceedings may be had therein according to law.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Barnett
...remain in the Court below to be determined by the Circuit Judges. Wayman vs. Southard, (10 Whea. (1), 21) (6 L.Ed. 253); Saunders vs. Gould, (4 Pet., 392.) (7 L.Ed. 897)' 7. This is buttressed by an earlier statement of the sponsor of the bill at 48 Cong.Rec. 8778: 'The next criticism (of t......
-
Jewell v. Knight
...21 Wall. 378. The whole case, even when its decision turns upon matter of law only, cannot be sent up by certificate of division. Saunders v. Gould, 4 Pet. 392; U. S. v. Bailey, 9 Pet. 267; Harris v. Elliott, 10 Pet. 25; White v. Turk, 12 Pet. 238; U. S. v. Briggs, 5 How. 208; Sadler v. Hoo......
-
Bagg v. Detroit
...... exceptions on writ of error. We can not, in either case,. prevent any party ... v. Turk., 12 Pet. 238; Saunders v. Gould, 4. Pet. 392; Nesmith v. Sheldon, 47 ......
-
Kelley-Goodfellow Shoe Co. v. Liberty Ins. Co.
...in this state, and, under those statutes, such certificates as that now in question have been constantly refused consideration. Saunders v. Gould, 4 Pet. 392; U. S. v. Bailey, 9 Pet. 272; Waterville v. Van Slyke, 116 U. S. 699, 6 Sup. Ct. 622; U. S. v. Hall, 131 U. S. 51, 9 Sup. Ct. 663; Je......