 | United States. Congress. House - 574 sider
...purpose, and is not comprised in the general powers arid jurisdiction of the court. It is a general rule, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a supreme court but that which specially appears to be so ; and, on the contrary, nothing s\\a\\ be intended... | |
 | 1852 - 632 sider
...645 ; William* v. Germaine, 7 B. & C. 468.) The rule of pleading the jurisdiction of Inferior Courts is, "that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a Superior but that which specially appears to be so : and, on the contrary, nothing shall be intended to be within... | |
 | 1848 - 562 sider
...expressed thus :—" The old rule I ordinary courts are bound to obey the process delifor jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of the Superior Courts but that which specially appears to be so ; nothing islntended to be within the... | |
 | California. Supreme Court - 1851 - 672 sider
...are courts of record, although inferior courts according to the constitution of the state, the law is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of such courts, but that which especially appears to be so ; and, on the contrary, nothing shall be intended... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1901 - 864 sider
...consideration than that accorded to those of inferior tribunals. Hurd, Hab. Corp. 367 et seq. The general rule is that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior court, except that which especially appears to be. Id. 367. We find it unnecessary to determine whether this... | |
 | 1852 - 1052 sider
...been made by persons who were creditors of the bankrupt. The doctrine laid down in Peacock v. Bell (2) is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior, or within the jurisdiction of an inferior Court. The cases of Everard v. Paterson (3) and Williams... | |
 | Edmund Hatch Bennett, Chauncey Smith - 1858 - 680 sider
...persons who were creditors of the bankrupt. The doctrine laid down in Peacock v. Bell, 1 Wms. Saund. 74, is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of a superior, or within the jurisdiction of an inferior court. The cases of Everard v. Paterson, 6 Taunt. 645, and... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1852 - 664 sider
...object is to impeach such jndgment on thi: ground of fraud. [2.] In regard to the Courts of general jurisdiction, the rule is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of their jurisdiction, but that which specially appears to be .so; and when such a Court has rendered... | |
 | Herbert Broom - 1852 - 616 sider
...of pleading, indeed, upon this subject, may be summed up thus : — " The old rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of the superior court but that which specially appears to be so ; nothing is intended to be within the... | |
| |
The old rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be out of the jurisdiction of the Superior Court but that which specially appears to be so... 
