APPEAL AND ERROR-Continued.
Review of a decree affecting division of conjugal property made by the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands is by appeal and not writ of error. De la Rama v. De la Rama.... 154 Where highest court of State refuses to review judgment of intermediate appellate court, it is to latter court that writ of error from this court runs. San Antonio & A. P. Ry. v. Wagner..
Chinese person detained for deportation held not entitled to direct appeal from judgment of District Court dismissing petition for habeas corpus. Chin Fong v. Backus.......
A statutory provision adding ten per cent. to amount of judgment if affirmed on appeal does not deny due process of law; nor does due process require State to provide for sus- pension of judgment pending appeal. Louisville & Nash- ville R. R. Co. v. Stewart . . . . . .
In Second Circuit practice well established that appeal from decree in admiralty to the Circuit Court of Appeals opens case for trial de novo. Reid v. American Express Co... 544 Circuit Court of Appeals is without power to compel party who has prosecuted both direct appeal from this court under § 238, Jud. Code, and writ of error from Circuit Court of Appeals, to elect which method he will pursue, and, in de- fault of his withdrawing the direct appeal, to dismiss the writ of error. Lamar v. United States......... . .
Court will not assume that Congress intended to cut off opportunity to revise doubtful questions of law and fact by imposing penalty for reasonable delay in payment caused by appeal based on sufficient cause. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Schmidt....
Sections 6509 and 6521, Mansfield's Digest, Laws of Arkansas, were not put in force in Indian Territory by Act of May 2, 1890; but quære as to § 6523. Gidney v. Chappel.
Affidavit of one party, showing on its face that it was to be used only as evidence for defendants, held not to be con- strued as appearance by affiant. Merriam v. Saalfield...... 22 Even though government of Porto Rico has sovereign attri- butes and has only consented to be sued in its own courts, the solemn appearance in the United States District Court, and the taking of other steps by, its Attorney General, held
to have amounted to a consent to be sued in that court, and thereafter government could not deny its jurisdiction. Richardson v. Fajardo Sugar Co... ..
APPLIANCES. See Employers' Liability Act; Safety Ap- liance Act.
APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATION:
Nothing in Act of Congress of 1911, apportioning represen- tation among States, prevents people of State from reserving right of approval or disapproval by referendum of a state act redistricting State for purpose of congressional elections. Davis v. Ohio..
ASSESSMENTS. See Condemnation of Land; Taxes and Taxation.
ASSUMPTION OF RISK. See Employers' Liability Act.
BAIL BONDS. See Criminal Law.
A transfer made by a bankrupt to his wife of certain valuable certificates of stock held to have been made before insol- vency. Stowe v. Harvey ...
That bankrupt broker did not have sufficient shares of stock of corporation on hand at time of his bankruptcy to satisfy demands of all his customers entitled thereto, held not to prevent such customers from obtaining any of such shares and require that all of such shares should go into general estate. Duel v. Hollins.
Delivery by broker of stock purchased on margin, after payment of amount due, may be made during insolvency without creating preference. Id.
Under § 64a, holders of tax-certificates who have paid taxes and assessments on property of bankrupt at tax sales which have been declared invalid, are entitled to reimbursement out of general fund of bankrupt's estate, with legal interest, but not with larger interest and penalties imposed by statute in redemptions. Dayton v. Pueblo County. . . . .... 588 Where agreement by way of compromise was made more than four months before petition filed, whereby payment was to be made from fund of which bankrupt entitled to residue, of all lienable claims, including claim of one who had waived right to file liens, but had subsequently filed claiming right so to do owing to failure of bankrupt to fulfil
contract; held, that payments made to such party within the four-month period were not recoverable by the trustee as preferential. Johnson v. Root Mfg. Co....
Where a bank holding a draft for collection, with instruc- tions to deliver documents attached only on payment, per- mitted drawee to take possession of goods covered by the documents on his agreeing to deposit the proceeds thereof as sold, such action on the part of the collecting bank con- stituted a payment in law of the draft if the value of the goods was not less than the amount of the draft. Russo- Chinese Bank v. National Bank of Commerce... Such action of the collecting bank amounted to a misappro- priation of the property and liability to account for its value immediately arose. Id.
Collecting bank became invested with ownership of goods and could not be excused from obligation to account by de- claring that goods had disappeared without its knowledge; the relation of principal and agent existed and, as agent, collecting bank was obligated to act in good faith to protect rights of owner of draft. Id.
Even if bank, sending draft for collection, suffers no loss on account of guaranty from original owner, it may, in view of its relation to commercial paper, demand, as principal, an accounting from its correspondent, and resist an action to recover back money received upon the draft. Id.
BEACONS. See Admiralty.
BENEFITS. See Condemnation of Land; Taxes and Taxa- tion.
Bill is contract; and, if interstate, to be construed in light of provisions of Carmack Amendment. Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Wall.
Provision in interstate bill is to be construed the same as to connecting or terminal carrier as to initial carrier. Georgia, F. & A. Ry, v. Blish Milling Co.. ...
Where provision in bill applicable and valid effect must be given thereto. Id.
Interpretation and effect may present Federal question, even though no affirmative proof that carrier has filed tariff schedules. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. Ry. v. Rankin.
Parties to contract made pursuant to Commerce Act cannot waive its terms. Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co... 190 One of objects of Carmack Amendment was uniformity of responsibility under interstate bills of lading. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. v. Harold.....
Under Carmack Amendment duty to issue and responsi- bilities thereunder is action of Congress, excluding state action thereon.
Bill issued by initial carrier upon interstate shipment gov- erns entire transportation and fixes obligations of all partici- pating carriers to extent that its terms are applicable and valid. Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co. Recitals in bill, signed by both carrier and shipper, that law- ful alternate rates based on valuations were offered, consti- tute admissions by shipper and prima facie evidence of choice, and cast on shipper burden of proof to contradict. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. Ry. v. Rankin............ Application by state court to interstate shipment of local rule investing innocent holder with rights not available to shipper is reversible error. A., T. & S. F. Ry. v. Harold 371 Quare, whether attributing to interstate bill characteristics in conflict with general commercial rule would not consti- tute direct burden on interstate commerce. Id. Where bill of interstate shipment requires notice of claim for misdelivery before action can be brought against initial carrier, such notice must be given to terminal carrier mak- ing misdelivery. Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co. 190 A stipulation in bill of interstate shipment that shipper must, as condition precedent to right of recovery for in- jury to shipment while in transit, give notice thereof in writ- ing to some officer or station agent of the initial carrier, is satisfied by notice to station agent of connecting or de- livering carrier. Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Wall.. Stipulation in bill requiring notice of claim before action brought held satisfied by telegram from shipper to terminal carrier. Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co. .. .. .. .. 190
Brokers and their customers stand in the relation of pledgee and pledgor. Duel v. Hollins......
In dealings between brokers and customers stock certificates issued by same corporation are to be treated as indistinguish- able tokens of actual values. Id.
As between themselves, after paying amount due broker on marginal transaction, customer may demand from broker delivery of stock, purchased for his account, and such de- livery made during insolvency is not preference. Id. Where bankrupt broker did not have sufficient shares of stock of corporation on hand at time of bankruptcy to satisfy demands of all customers entitled thereto, held that such customers were entitled to such shares on demanding same, participating pro rata in division of shares actually on hand. Id.
BURDEN OF PROOF. See Evidence.
Title to stock may be transferred by delivery of certificates and the corporate books are not open for public information. Stowe v. Harvey... .
Liability of initial and connecting carriers under. Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co. ... .
CARRIERS. See Bill of Lading; Common Carriers; Em- ployers' Liability Act; Interstate Commerce; Rail- roads; Safety Appliance Act.
CASES OVERRULED, ETC.:
Matter of Heff, 197 U. S. 488, overruled. Nice
For cases approved, distinguished, explained and followed, see Table of Cases in front of volume.
CERTIFICATES OF STOCK. See Brokers.
Where granted to review question of law, assumption that lower courts right where they agreed upon construction of facts. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Schmidt....
Petitions for writ of certiorari to state courts or other proper
proceeding under the Act of Congress of December 23, 1914, denied. Stowe v. Taylor....
Callaghan v. Massachusetts.
Baltimore v. United Railways...
(These were the first proceedings under the Act of 1914.) Amendment of Rule 37, relative to presentation of petitions for. See p. 635.
« ForrigeFortsett » |