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

FARRAR & BROWN V. UNITED STATES, 28 U. S. 459 (1830)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 28 U. S. 459 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Farrar & Brown v. United States, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 459 459 (1830)

Farrar & Brown v. United States

28 U.S. (3 Pet.) 459


The practice has uniformly been, since the seat of government was removed to Washington, for the clerk of the Court to enter at the first term to which any writ of error or appeal is returnable, in cases in which the United States is party, the appearance of the Attorney General of the United States. This practice has never been objected to. The practice would not be conclusive against the Attorney General if he should at the first term withdraw his appearance or move to strike it off. But if he lets it pass for one term, it is conclusive upon him as to an appearance. The decisions of this Court have uniformly been that an appearance cures any defects in the form of process.

Mr. Benton moved the Court for leave to reinstate this case, which had been dismissed on a former day of the term for want of an appearance of the plaintiffs in error.

At the first term, when the writ of error was filed, the Clerk of the Court had entered the appearance of the Attorney General of the United States, according to the usual practice in such cases.

The Attorney General now said he should not object to the reinstatement if the Court thought it proper under the circumstances, but he had intended to take an objection at the time when the suit was dismissed if any person had then appeared. It was that the citation for the writ of error was returnable to a day out of term, to-wit, on the first Monday of January, 1828, instead of the second Monday of that year.

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 |™