TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Gibbons v. Ogden

Gibbons v. Ogden, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 448 (1821)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
March 15, 1821
Citations
19 U.S. 4485 L. Ed. 3026 Wheat. 4481821 U.S. LEXIS 363
Headnotes
(Practice.) A decree of the highest Court of Equity of a State, affirming the de> cretal order of an inferior Court of Equity of the same State, refusing to dissolve an injunction granted on the. filing of the bill, is not a final decree within the 25tb section of the judiciary act of 1789, . c. 20. from, which an appeal lies to this Court.
Summary
Appeal from the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and the Correction of Errors of the State of New-York. This was a bill filed by the plaintiff .helow, (Ogden,) against the defendant below, (Gibbons,) in the Court of Chancery of the State of New-York, for an injunction to restrain the defendant from navigating certain steam boats on the waters of the State of New-York, lying between Elizabethtown, in the State of New-Jersey, and the City of New-York; the exclusive navigation of which with steam boats had been granted, by the legislature of New-York, to Livingston and Fulton, under whom the plaintiff below claimed as assignee. On this bill an injunction was granted by the Chancellor, and on the coming in of the answer, which set up a right to navigate with steam boats between the City of New-York and Elizabethtown, under a license to carry on the coasting trade, granted under the laws of the United States, the defendant below moved to dissolve the injunction, which motion was denied by the Chancellor. The defendant below appealed to the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and the Correction of Errors; the decretal order, refusing to dissolve the injunction, was affirmed by that Court; and from this last order the defendant below appealed to this Court, upon the ground, that the case involved a question arising under the constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States. but on inspecting the record, it not appearing that any final decree in the caiise, within the terms of the 25th section of the judiciary act of 1789, e. 20. had been pronounced in the State Court, the appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion

Decree. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record of the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and the Correction of Errors, of *450 th,e State of New-York. On inspection . whereof, it is. ordered, that the appeal, nr this cause, be¿ and the same is. hereby dismissed, it not appearing from the record that there was a final decree in said Court for the Correction of Errors, &c. from which an appeal was taken.

a a Vide 4

Johns. Ch.Rep.

150. and 17 Johns.

Rep. 488. where ■the learned reader will find the case reported as decided in the State Courts.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1824–1825: 21834–1835: 11854–1855: 11858–1859: 11868–1869: 11888–1889: 11904–1905: 11932–1933: 11952–1953: 11962–1963: 118242026peak 1824 · 2

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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