Supreme Court of the United States, 1862

Hecker v. Fowler

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 18, 1862 · Taney

66 U.S. 95; 17 L. Ed. 45; 1 Black 95; 1861 U.S. LEXIS 456 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. Andrews, of New York, in support of the motion., Mr. Monroe, of New York, resisted the motion.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Philadelphia Casualty Co. v. Fechheimer (6th Cir. 1915)
Sparrow v. Strong (Supreme Court of the United States 1866)

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

Mr. Chief Justice TANEY.

We are asked to. dismiss this writ because no error appears on the face of the record. It is not necessary, by the practice of this court, for the party who brings a cause here to specify upon the record the errors he complains of, and they are not even informally brought to our notice until the argument is heard. Want of jurisdiction and irregularity of the writ are tlie only grounds for dismissal. Where a judgment appears to have been rendered which the party is entitled to have revised in this court, and it is also seen that it comes here for such revision upon proper process, duly issued, all other questions must await the final hearing. To say that there is no error in this judgment, and affirm it *96 for that reason, would be to decide the whole legal merits; of the case, and this we cannot do-on a motion to dismiss or quash the writ.

Motion denied.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.