Court Opinion

ID: 9422486
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:02:52.525324+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:37.117742
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Clark,
with whom
Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice Stewart join, dissents,
believing that the appeal abated upon the death of the appellant, Edward J. Wetzel. Menken v. Atlanta, 131 U. S. 405 (1889). This Court has held numerous times that the existence of a judgment taxing costs in such cases cannot alone prevent dismissal here. Heitmuller v. Stokes, 256 U. S. 359, 362 (1921); Wingert v. First National Bank, 223 U. S. 670 (1912); Paper-Bag Machine Co. v. Nixon, 105 U. S. 766, 772 (1881); Elastic Fabrics Co. v. Smith, 100 U. S. 110 (1879). Although such judgments may confer appellate jurisdiction to inquire into the lower court’s power to tax costs, Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co., 265 U. S. 78, 82-83 (1924); Citizens’ Bank v. Cannon, 164 U. S. 319, 323-324 (1896); cf. Intertype Corp. v. Clark-Congress Corp., 249 F. 2d 626, 628 (1957), the existence of such a judgment has been held not to confer jurisdiction to inquire into the merits of the original controversy, Smith v. Indiana, 191 U. S. 138, 149 (1903); Davis v. Preston, 280 U. S. 406, 408 (1930). Accordingly, the motion to substitute the administratrix as a party should be denied, the appeal dismissed and the case remanded to the Supreme Court of Ohio for such proceedings as may be appropriate under state law.