TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Logan v. Patrick

Logan v. Patrick, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 288 (1809)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
March 18, 1809
Citations
9 U.S. 2883 L. Ed. 1035 Cranch 2881809 U.S. LEXIS 434

Opinion

9 U.S. 288 5 Cranch 288 3 L.Ed. 103

LOGAN v. PATRICK.

February Term, 1809 1

THIS was a case certified from the circuit court for the 7th circuit and district of Kentucky, in which the judges below differed in opinion upon the following questions:

2

Whether the complainant, (Logan,) who is a citizen of the state of Kentucky, and is so stated in the pleadings, can maintain this suit, in this court, against the defendant, who is a citizen and inhabitant of the state of Virginia, and is so stated in the pleadings, upon the following case: John Patrick obtained in this court a judgment in ejectment against David Logan, who filed a bill in equity against him to be relieved against the judgment, and to compel a conveyance of the land, and obtained an injunction to stay proceedings on the judgment; but the subpoena was not served in the district of Kentucky. Can this court entertain jurisdiction of the cause? If not, does the defendant's answering the bill, without insisting upon the objection that the process was not served upon him in the district of Kentucky, authorize the court to entertain the cause?

3

THE COURT, upon the first opening of the case, said there could be no doubt of the jurisdiction of the court below, and ordered it to be certified accordingly.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 17 cases

View all citing references →
1861–1862: 11871–1872: 11875–1876: 11881–1882: 11883–1884: 11887–1888: 11891–1892: 11895–1896: 11897–1898: 31903–1904: 11905–1906: 21921–1922: 11947–1948: 11951–1952: 118612026peak 1897 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Krippendorf v. Hyde110 U.S. 276 (1884)
  2. Brun v. Mann151 F. 145 (8th Cir. 1906)
  3. Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, Inc.282 F. 550 (2d Cir. 1922)
  4. Campbell v. Golden Cycle Min. Co.141 F. 610 (8th Cir. 1905)
  5. Cortes Co. v. Thannhauser9 F. 226 (1881)
  6. United States v. Hartford-Empire Co.73 F. Supp. 979 (D. Del. 1947)

Most recent

  1. Hadden v. Rumsey Products, Inc.96 F. Supp. 988 (W.D.N.Y. 1951)
  2. United States v. Hartford-Empire Co.73 F. Supp. 979 (D. Del. 1947)
  3. Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, Inc.282 F. 550 (2d Cir. 1922)
  4. Brun v. Mann151 F. 145 (8th Cir. 1906)
  5. Campbell v. Golden Cycle Min. Co.141 F. 610 (8th Cir. 1905)
  6. Leigh v. Kewanee Mfg. Co.127 F. 990 (1904)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Rush v. Parker, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 287 (1809) 4
Logan v. Patrick, 9 U.S. 288 (1809) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list