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

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
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 : 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

DELAWARE, L. & WESTERN R. CO. V. RELLSTAR, 276 U. S. 1 (1928)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 276 U. S. 1 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Delaware, L. & Western R. Co. v. Rellstar, 276 U.S. 1 (1928)

Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company v. Rellstar

No. 141

Argued January 5, 1928

Decided January 16, 1928

276 U.S. 1


1. The power of the district court to set aside its judgment because of perjured testimony ends with the term in which the judgment was entered. P. 276 U. S. 4.

2. The circuit court of appeals has jurisdiction, by mandamus, to require the reinstatement of a judgment of the district court which it has affirmed and which the district court, without jurisdiction, has afterwards assumed to set aside for perjury. P. 276 U. S. 5.

3. Mandamus to enforce a judgment should not be refused on the ground of injustice where the judgment has become unassailable and the injustice depends on a speculation as to which of three conflicting statements of a witness -- a confessed perjurer -- was true. P. 276 U. S. 5.

15 F.2d 137, reversed.

Certiorari, 273 U.S. 685, to a judgment of the circuit court of appeals which refused to grant a writ of mandamus requiring the district court to reinstate a judgment which it had assumed to set aside. The judgment was one recovered by the above-named petitioner as defendant in an action for personal injuries, etc. See also 296 Fed. 439. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 276 U. S. 4

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™