Grayson v. Virginia
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- State Ex Rel. Haskell v. Huston (Okla. 1908)
- State v. District Court of Salt Lake County (Utah 1942)
- American Indemnity Co. v. Detroit Fidelity & Surety Co. (5th Cir. 1933)
- Chaffraix v. Board of Liquidation (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1882)
- State of New Jersey v. the State of New York (Supreme Court of the United States 1831)
- Rodriguez v. West Coast Aircraft Maintenance (United States District Court for the District of Arizona 2019)
- State v. Roberts (Ind. 1948)
- Studabaker v. Markley (Ind. Ct. App. 1893)
- In re Finks (District Court, W.D. Virginia 1889)
- Whitford v. . the Panama Railroad Company (N.Y. 1861)
- State of New York v. State of Connecticut Et Al. (Supreme Court of the United States 1799)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
:—After a particular examination of the powers veiled in this Court, in caufes of Equity, as well as in caufcs of Admiralty and Maritime jurifdidlion, w>e colled! a general rule for .the .government of- out proceedings; with a diferetionary, authority, however, to deviate from that rule, where its application wou’dbe injurious or iinpradücabio. The general rule preferibes to us an adoption of that practice,.whiqb is founded on the cufíoro and ufage ofCourls of Admiralty arid ■ Equity, conilituted on fimilar principles; but ftill, It is thought, that we are alfa autbórifcd to, make fuch deviations as are ne-ceffar'y to adapt the procefs and rules'of the Court to the pecu- • iiarcircumftances of this country, fubjedl to the interpolation, alteration, and controul, of the Legiilature' * .
W e have* therefore, agreed to malee the following general Orders; and the Cdunfel, in the prefent cafe, will take his meafures accordingly. • . '
I.. Ordered That when procefs at Common Law, dr in Equity, ihall iffue- againft a State, the fame íhall be ferved upon the Governor, or Chief Executive Magiilrate, and the " Attorney-General, of fuch State.
*321 2. Ordered, That procefs of fubpcena iffuing opt of this Court, in any fuit in Equity, fhall be ferved on the Defendant fixty days before the return day of the faid procefs : and, further, that if the Defendant, on fuch fervice of the fubpcena, (ball not appear alt the return day contained therein, the complainant fhall be at liberty to proceed ex parte.
Lewis the.n obferved, that the fubpcena in this caf-, had been iffued on the fame principles j but as the orders could only operate in futuro, he thought it beft to withdraw his ¡notiomfer a difiringas, and to pray that an alias fubpcena might be awarded ; which was, accordingly, done.
Seethe Judicial Act, f. 14. The Act to regulate Procc.%s.ih the Í'ediíra'Courts, iV ». ■' ■
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.