About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Dupasseur v. Rochereau U.S. 130 (1875)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0466 and id is 1 raw text is: DUPASSEUR V. ROCHEREAU. [Sup. Ct. Syllabus. and presents no record evidence of the sheriff's acts. We think the return under the circumstances was, at least, trav- ersable, and that it was properly shown that no actual seizure of the property in dispute was ever made by the sheriff. JUDGMENT REVERSED, and A VENIRE DE NOVO AWARDED. DUPASsEUR v. ROCHEREAU. I. When, in a case in a State court, a right or immunity is set up under and by virtue of a judgment of a court of the United States, and the de- cision is against such right or immunity, a case is presented for removal and review by writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States under the act of February 6th, 1867. 2. In such a case, the Supreme Court will examine and inquire whether or not due validity and effect have been accorded to the judgment of the Federal court, and if they have not, and the right or immunity claimed has been thereby lost, it will reverse the judgment of the State court. 3. Whether due validity and effect have or have not been accorded to the judgment of the Federal court will depend on the circumstances of the case. If jurisdiction of the case was acquired only by reason of the citizenship of the parties, and the State law alone was administered, then only such validity and effect can be claimed for the judgment as would be due to a judgment of the State courts under like circumstances. 4. Judgment was rendered by the Circuit Court of the United States for Louisiana on a vendor's privilege and mortgage, declaring it to be the first lien and privilege on the land; and the marshal sold the property clear of all prior liens; and the mortgagee purchased, and paid into court for the benefit of subsequent liens, the surplus of his bid beyond the amount of his own debt. This judgment and sale were set up by way of defence to a suit brought in the State court by another mort- gagee, who claimed -priority to the first mortgage, and who had not been made a party to the suit in the Circuit Court. The State court held that the plaintiff was not bound by the former judgment on the question of priority, not being a party to the suit. The case was brought to the Supreme Court of the United States by writ of error, and this court held, that the State court did not refuse to accord due force and effect to the judgment; that such a judgment in the State courts would not be conclusive on the point in question, and the judgment of the Circuit Court could not have any-greater force or effect than judgments in the State courts.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most