Tucker v. Masser

Last updated
Tucker v. Masser
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued January 9, 1885
Decided January 26, 1885
Full case nameTucker & Another v. Masser & Others
Citations 113 U.S. 203 ( more )
5 S. Ct. 420; 28 L. Ed. 979
Court membership
Chief Justice
Morrison Waite
Associate Justices
Samuel F. Miller  · Stephen J. Field
Joseph P. Bradley  · John M. Harlan
William B. Woods  · T. Stanley Matthews
Horace Gray  · Samuel Blatchford
Case opinions
Majority Field, joined by unanimous

Tucker v. Masser, 113 U.S. 203 (1885), was an action of ejectment for the possession of three lots in what is known as Stevens' and Leiter's subdivision of the City of Leadville, in Lake county, Colorado. The court found that this case for a placer mining claim composed of distinct mining locations some of which were made after 1870 and together embracing over one hundred and 60 acres (240,000 m2) is valid. Smelting Co. v. Kemp, 104 U.S. 636 (1881), was carefully considered, and was again affirmed. [1]

Leadville, Colorado Statutory City in Colorado, United States

Leadville is the statutory city that is the county seat and only incorporated municipality in Lake County, Colorado, United States. The city population was 2,759 at the 2017 United States Census. Situated at an elevation of 10,152 feet (3,094 m), Leadville has the highest elevation of any incorporated city in the United States. Originally called Silver City, Leadville was the last place Doc Holliday was a law man and the first proposed capital of the state. A former silver mining town that lies amongst the headwaters of the Arkansas River in the heart of the Rocky Mountains, the Leadville Historic District contains many historic structures and sites in its dynamic mining era. In the late 19th century, Leadville was the second most populous city in Colorado, after Denver. Leadville is notable for having a large number of 14,000 foot peaks viewable from town.

<i>United States Reports</i> official record of the rulings, orders, case tables, and other proceedings of the Supreme Court of the United States

The United States Reports are the official record of the rulings, orders, case tables, in alphabetical order both by the name of the petitioner and by the name of the respondent, and other proceedings of the Supreme Court of the United States. United States Reports, once printed and bound, are the final version of court opinions and cannot be changed. Opinions of the court in each case are prepended with a headnote prepared by the Reporter of Decisions, and any concurring or dissenting opinions are published sequentially. The Court's Publication Office oversees the binding and publication of the volumes of United States Reports, although the actual printing, binding, and publication are performed by private firms under contract with the United States Government Publishing Office.

Contents

See also

Related Research Articles

Cole v. City of La Grange, 113 U.S. 1 (1885), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled on eminent domain to benefit a private corporation.

Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia S. S. Co. v. Commissioners of Emigration, 113 U.S. 33 (1885), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, in which the court held that the plaintiff was in error, being a corporation under the laws of Great Britain, and an alien, had brought this action in the circuit court of the United States for the Southern district of New York, the defendant being a corporation of that state.

Head v. Amoskeag Mfg. Co., 113 U.S. 9 (1885), was a U.S. Supreme Court case considering whether a dam constructed on privately owned land served a public purpose and whether having the owner of the dam compensate any adjacent landowner was a legal form of eminent domain.

Davison v. Von Lingen, 113 U.S. 40 (1885), was a United States Supreme Court case.

Hess v. Reynolds, 113 U.S. 73 (1885), was Supreme Court case determining whether a probate case from Michigan should be moved to federal court and, if so, which federal court should hear it. The court issued a writ of error on the judgment of the Eastern District of Michigan federal court for remanding a case back to the state court and determined that was indeed the appropriate federal court to hear the case.

Polleys v. Black River Improvement Co., 113 U.S. 81 (1885), was a writ of error in the circuit court of Wisconsin for La Crosse County, and a motion was made to dismiss it.

Pullman Palace Car Co. v. Speck, 113 U.S. 84 (1885), was an appeals case from the circuit court for the Northern district of Illinois a case that had been removed from that court. The appeal was on the grounds that while a party who has a case for removal is not put to his election to exercise or abandon the right to remove at the moment of entering his appearance, he is not permitted unreasonably to delay this election during all the period incident to the preparation of the case, until both parties find themselves in condition to go to trial at law.

<i>Clawson v. United States</i> United States Supreme Court case

Clawson v. United States, 113 U.S. 143 (1885), was a case regarding a Utah territorial statute which authorized an appeal by a defendant in a criminal action from a final judgment of conviction, which provides that an appeal shall stay execution upon filing with the clerk a certificate of a judge that in his opinion there is probable cause for the appeal, and further provides that after conviction, a defendant who has appealed may be admitted to bail as of right when the judgment is for the payment of a fine only, and as matter of discretion in other cases, does not confer upon a defendant convicted and sentenced to pay a fine and be imprisoned the right, after appeal and filing of certificate of probable cause, to be admitted to bail except within the discretion of the court.

Bicknell v. Comstock, 113 U.S. 149 (1885), was an action to recover the cost paid for a tract of land in Iowa and the value of the improvements made by the defendant. The complaint alleged a conveyance by Bicknell to one Bennett, the subsequent transfer to the defendant by sundry mesne conveyances, valuable improvements on the premises made by Bennett and his grantees, and a failure of title in Bicknell when the deed was made by reason of a superior title in the State of Iowa under a land grant. Judgment below for plaintiff, to reverse which this writ of error was brought.

United States v. Mueller, 113 U.S. 153 (1885), was a contracts case before the United States Supreme Court.

Caillot v. Deetken, 113 U.S. 215 (1885), was a writ of error filed in the circuit court recorded March 16, 1882, and the transcript that was returned with it was filed in this Court November 28, 1884. Two full terms of the Court had passed between the filing of the writ of error in the circuit court and its return with the transcript into this Court.

Dakota County v. Glidden, 113 U.S. 222 (1885), was a motion to dismiss a suit issued in aid of a railroad. Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant brought a writ of error to reverse it. Subsequently, to the judgment, Dakota County, Nebraska settled with the plaintiff and other bondholders, by giving them new bonds bearing a less rate of interest, and the old bonds, which were the cause of action in this suit, were surrendered and destroyed. These facts were brought before this Court by affidavits and transcripts from the county records, accompanied by a motion to dismiss the writ of error.

Central R. Co. of N. J. v. Mills, 113 U.S. 249 (1885), involved a case where the Court of Claims had dismissed a petition of the claimants, regarding the rejection of two items sued for: (1) labor done and materials furnished by the claimants in constructing the coffer dams, and in performing the work necessarily connected therewith and preliminary to the masonry work for the piers and abutments, (2) loss and damages resulting to the claimants in consequence of the reduction of the dimensions of the piers and abutments made subsequently to the making of the contract.

Coon v. Wilson, 113 U.S. 268 (1885), was a suit regarding the infringement of reissued letters patent No. 8, 169, granted to the plaintiff, Washington Wilson, as inventor, April 9, 1878, on an application therefor filed March 11, 1878, for an "improvement in collars," the original patent, No. 197,807, having been granted to him December 4, 1877. The patent was for a "standing collar" resulting in a more comfortable fit.

Stone v. Chisolm, 113 U.S. 302 (1885), was a writ of error to reverse a judgment of the Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina, which dismissed the complaint in which the plaintiff asked for recovery in the sum of $1,050 with interest from July 1, 1883 Sixty bonds or obligations of the Marine and River Phosphate Mining and Manufacturing Company of South Carolina which became totally insolvent.

Santa Anna v. Frank, 113 U.S. 339 (1885), was a case with no special finding of facts, the general finding of the issues for the plaintiff was not open to review by this court. Town of Martinton, Illinois v. Fairbanks, 112 U.S. 670; S. C. ante, 321. Questions were discussed by counsel for the defendant as to the legal authority of the town to issue the bonds referred to, fairly arose upon the first count of the declaration. But their determination could not affect the judgment, for the common counts were sufficient under the statutes of Illinois to support the judgment without reference to any question of the legal authority to issue the bonds described in the first count. Rev. St. Ill. 1870, c. 110, 58; Bond v. Dustin, 112 U.S. 604; S. C. ante, 296.

Erhardt v. Boaro, 113 U.S. 537 (1885), was a suit instituted in equity ancillary to a principal action brought for the possession of a mining claim. The object of the suit was to restrain the commission of waste by the defendants pending the outcome of the main action.

California Artificial Stone Paving Co. v. Molitor, 113 U.S. 609 (1885), involved a bill that was filed by the appellant against the appellee complaining that the latter was infringing on a letters patent granted to one John J. Schillinger, and which had been assigned for the State of California to the complainant.

Maxwell's Executors v. Wilkinson, 113 U.S. 656 (1885), was a writ of error brought by the executors of a former collector of the port of New York to reverse a judgment in an action brought against him by the defendant in error to recover duties paid by them on imported iron.

References

  1. Tucker v. Masser, 113 U.S. 203 (1885).