CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


METROPOLITAN R. CO. V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 132 U. S. 1 (1889)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 132 U. S. 1 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Metropolitan R. Co. v. District of Columbia, 132 U.S. 1 (1889)

Metropolitan Railroad Company v. District of Columbia

No. 5

Argued November 22, 1885

Decided October 21, 1889

132 U.S. 1

Syllabus

The District of Columbia is a municipal corporation, having a right to sue and be sued, and is subject to the ordinary rules that govern the law of procedure between private persons.

The Maryland statute of limitations of 1715, which is in force in the District of Columbia, embraces municipal corporations.

The sovereign power of the District of Columbia is lodged in the government of the United States, and not in the corporation of the District.

This Court expresses no opinion upon the question whether, when the right of property in highways and public places is vested in a municipality, an assertion of that right against purprestures or public nuisances is subject to the law of limitations.

An action by a municipal corporation to recover from a street railroad company the cost of maintaining pavements in a street which the company is by its charter bound to maintain is not an action upon the statute, but one in assumpsit.

Assumpsit. Verdict for the plaintiff, and judgment on the verdict. The defendant sued out this writ of error. The case is stated in the opinion. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 132 U. S. 2





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED