The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-05-14
Legal Intellig cuce.

SurRrsY CorRT OF THE UMTKp STATES May Mo 90
joseph GuitaJd ct al plaintiffs in error, Henry Stod
dard The argument of this cause was concluded by Mr.
Geyer for the plaintiffs in No 100 James Irwin
appellant, VS.. the United States This sub
med TO the Court on the record and printed arguments
by Nessrs. Wye and Richie fer the appellant and by
Attorney General Cushing for the appellees. No. 1906
Mary Barney appellant, David Saunders ct al The
argument of this commenced by Mr. Linton
for the appellant and continued by Mr. Lawrence for tie
appellee.
wife, appellants the Union Bank Of Louisiana. APP
peal from the District Court Of the United States for
Texas Mr. Justice Mclean delivered the opinion Of this
Court overrulng the motion TO dismiss this appeal and
award protedendo, &c. No los. Mary E. Barney appel
liant vs. la,d Saunders, ct al The argument of this
and concluded by Mr. Chiffon for the appellant.
Rule No ts:-Iirst. In all cases where I of error
or an appeal shall be brought to this Court from any
judgment decree rendered thirty before the
mencemcnt OF tie term it shall be the duty Of the plain
I'm en- ps Ie liant as the BE- to Ct
this court within the first six days of the term and If
the witt OF error or appeal shall be brought from udy
nent or decree rendered less than thirty days before the
commencement Of the term shall he the duty Of the
plaintiff in appellant 10 docket the cause, ard
file the record thereof with the clerk of this Court with
in the first thirty days Of the term and the plaintiff
in error or app cant shall fail TO comply with this rule
the detendant in error appellee may have the
doekeed and dismissed uon producing certificate from
the clerk Of tie Court wherein the Judgment decree
was rendered stating the and certify that such
writ Of error appeal has been duly sued and allow
cd And in no case shall the plaintiff in appel
Isn't be entitled 10 docket the and Gle The record
after The same fha have been docketed and dismissed
under tie rule, unless by order OF the Court the
sent Of tie opposite party.
second Bat the defendant in appellee at
his option docket the and file copy of the record
with the clerk q this Court ana if the is docketed
and copy Of the record filed with The clerk OF this Court
W either futty within the periods Of time above limited
and described ~ this rule the shall stand for argu
mont al the term.
Itd. IN oil cases where The period Of thirty days Is
mentioned in THE rule il shall be extended sixty days
IN writs OF and appeals from California Oregon
Washington, New Mexico, and Utah.-1oy 2, 1854.
NAY s.-SurRxrE CcuR1 oY TIE UNITED srArEs-G II
Jarrett ESQ OF FepnHy hAna, and j. francis Clements
lsq, OF Washington City, y. c. were admitted attorneys
aId councillors Of this court
30. 81. Alcxander j. Marshall vs. the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad Company, in TO the Circuit Court OF
TIE United states for the district MARYLAND Mr. Jus
tce Gricr delivered the opinion Of this court Affirming
Tic judgment Of the said Circuit Court in this cause
with costs
No. ll2 Cherries davenport ct AL vs. r. Fletcher ct al
in error TO the Circuit Court OF the United States for Fast
lfusiana Mr. Justice Mclean delivered the opinion of
The court, Diminishing this writ Of with costs for
iIreguariy.
No. 60 The steamboat New World, Edward Mnturn
et al claimants, appellants Frederick G. King This
cause was submitted 10 the court on the record and
printed arguments by Mr. Cutting for the appellants,
and - Mr.. Mayer for the appellee.
10. lld, Timothy Tanning, appellant, Charles Gre
gous, e. al The argument Of this enced
by Mr. Wson for the appellant. and continued By Mr.
smith for the appelees Adjourned