Roosevelt v. Meyer
Opinion of the Court
At a subsequent day,
delivered the opinion of the court.
He stated it to be the conclusion of their honors, upon an examination of the record, that as the validity of the act of February 25th, 1862, was drawn in question', and the judgment of the Court of Errors and Appeals of the State of New York was in favor of it, and of the right set up by the defendant, this court had no jurisdiction to reverse that judgment; that the dismissal of the case was accordingly to be directed. In support of the decision which he announced the learned Justice referred to various cases in this court which are mentioned in the note below.
Motion granted.
Gordon v. Caldcleugh, 3 Cranch, 268; Fulton v. McAffee, 16 Peters, 149; Strader v. Baldwin, 9 Howard, 261; Linton v. Stanton, 12 Id., 423.
Reference
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Where a certificate, coming up with the record from the highest court of law or equity of a State, certifies only that on the “ hearing” of the case a party “ relied upon” such and such provisions of the Constitution of the United States, “ insisting” that the eifect was to render an act of Congress void, as unconstitutional, which said claim, the record went on to say, “ was overruled and disallowed by this court,” and the record itself shows nothing except that the statute which it was argued contravened these provisions, was drawn in question,' and that the decision was in favor of the statute, and of the rights set up by the party relying on it; no writ of error lies from this court to such highest State court under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act of 1789.