TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Latham's and Deming's Appeals

Latham's & Deming's Appeals, 76 U.S. (9 Wall.) 145 (1870)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
April 20, 1870
Docket
No. 6
Citations
76 U.S. 14519 L. Ed. 7719 Wall. 1451869 U.S. LEXIS 951

Opinion

76 U.S. 145 19 L.Ed. 771 19 L.Ed. 772 9 Wall. 145

LATHAM'S AND DEMING'S APPEALS.

December Term, 1869

THESE were two appeals from the Court of Claims, in suits against the United States. They had been passed at former terms, and early at this one. It being alleged by Mr. Hoar, Attorney-General, that they involved a question of public interest to wit, the legal tender question—which he desired, for some reasons which he stated, to have passed on anew, he asked the court to fix a day at this term for argument upon them, it being stated by him that it was, in his opinion, most desirable that the matter should not be postponed to the next term. After opposition and some delays by Messrs. Carlisle and Merryman, for the appellants respectively , who denied that any question of legal tender was presented in the records, and asserted that the cases, whenever called, had been passed, on an understanding by themselves, the counsel of the government, and the court, that if any such question were properly in them it should abide the decision to be made in Hepburn v. Griswold , * then under consideration by the court—a day was fixed for the hearing of the cases. When the day arrived the cases were postponed, owing to another case being before the court. Being finally called, Mr. L. S. Chatfield, with whom was Mr. Merryman, for the appellants respectively , offered a stipulation signed by them in behalf of their clients, and moved to dismiss the appeals. The Attorney-General opposed the motion; stating that it was a surprise to him; that he was now prepared to argue the cases, and desired to do so.

After some conference on the bench, where the judges did not seem to be entirely unanimous, the court withdrew for consultation. On their return, the CHIEF JUSTICE announced it as the unanimous judgment of the court that the appellants had a right to have their appeals dismissed, and they were both DISMISSED ACCORDINGLY.

* The Legal Tender Case, 8 Wallace, 603.

How later courts describe this case

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

1877–1878: 21895–1896: 11897–1898: 11905–1906: 21929–1930: 11957–1958: 118772026peak 1877 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Donaghyv. McCorkle118 Tenn. 73 (1906)
  2. United States v. Young94 U.S. 258 (1877)
  3. Fort v. Fort118 Tenn. 103 (1906)
  4. Rolin v. United States160 F. Supp. 264 (Ct. Cl. 1958)
  5. O'Rourke v. O'Rourke1930 OK 149, 286 P. 341
  6. Darlington-Miller Lumber Co. v. Hall46 P. 493 (Okla. 1896)

Most recent

  1. Rolin v. United States160 F. Supp. 264 (Ct. Cl. 1958)
  2. O'Rourke v. O'Rourke1930 OK 149, 286 P. 341
  3. Donaghyv. McCorkle118 Tenn. 73 (1906)
  4. Fort v. Fort118 Tenn. 103 (1906)
  5. Sterrett v. National Safe Deposit, Savings & Trust Co.10 App. D.C. 131 (D.C. Cir. 1897)
  6. Darlington-Miller Lumber Co. v. Hall46 P. 493 (Okla. 1896)

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
The Maggie Hammond, 76 U.S. (9 Wall.) 435 (1870) 95
Latham's & Deming's Appeals, 76 U.S. 145 (1869) 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