Supreme Court of the United States, 1891

In re Ingalls

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided April 13, 1891 · Per Curiam

139 U.S. 548; 11 S. Ct. 652; 35 L. Ed. 266; 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2406 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. de Lagnel Berier for petitioners submitted on his brief. Mr. Edward D. McCarthy also filed a brief for petitioners., Mr. George W. Van Slyck for Elizabeth A. L. Hyatt, opposing.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Lefkowitz v. Foster Hose Supporter Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1908)

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

Per Curíam.

This is an application for a writ of error made to the court in session, under the apprehension on the part of counsel that it was directed to be so presented. We have, therefore, considered it, with the result that the writ must be denied. Dale Tile Mfg. Co. v. Hyatt, 125 U. S. 46; Walter A. Wood Co. v. Skinner, ante, 293.

We wish it to be distinctly .understood that in future no •such application will be entertained, except when a Justice of this Court, upon consideration of the record, has deemed it proper under special circumstances to endorse thereon a request that counsel be permitted to proceed in that way.

Writ refused.

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