Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

County of Madison v. Warren

County of Madison v. Warren, 106 U.S. 622 (1883)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1883-02-18
Topic
general

Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court. This is a case tried and determined by the court without the intervention of a jury. The record does not show any stipulation in writing waiving a jury. The errors assigned all relate to. rulings of the court on the trial, excepted to at the time, and presented by a bill of exceptions.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed County of Madison v. Warren. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
18 opinions
COUNTY OF MADISON v. WARREN,106 U.S. 622(1882)
2 S.Ct. 86
COUNTY OF MADISONv. WARREN.
OCTOBER TERM, 1882.
Where, in a case tried by the court below, the record does not affirmatively show a written stipulation waiving a jury, the questions decided at the trial cannot be re-examined here on a writ of error.
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois.

The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Charles P. Wisefor the plaintiff in error.Mr. T.C. Matherfor the defendant in error.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a case tried and determined by the court without the intervention of a jury. The record does not show any stipulation in writing waiving a jury. The errors assigned all relate to rulings of the court on the trial, excepted to at the time, and presented by a bill of exceptions. The rule is well settled, that if a written stipulation waiving a jury is not in some wayPage 623shown affirmatively in the record, none of the questions decided at the trial can be re-examined here on writ of error.Kearneyv.Case, 12 Wall. 275;Gilmanv.Illinois MississippiTelegraph Co.,91 U.S. 603;Boogherv.New York LifeInsurance Co., 103 id. 90;Hodgesv.Easton, ante, p. 408.

For this reason, and without passing on any of the questions presented by the assignment of errors, the judgment isAffirmed.

NOTE. —County of Alexanderv.Kimball, error to the same court as the preceding case, was submitted byMr. William B.Gilbertfor the plaintiff in error, and byMr. T.C. Matherfor the defendant in error. It involved the precise question decided in that case, and a judgment to the same effect was rendered.