This is a list of cases reported in volume 144 of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1892.

Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of volume 144 U.S.

The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices). Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).

When the cases in volume 144 U.S. were decided the Court comprised the following eight members (Justice Joseph P. Bradley had died in January 1892):

Portrait Justice Office Home State Succeeded Date confirmed by the Senate(Vote) Tenure on Supreme Court Melville Fuller Chief Justice Illinois Morrison Waite (41–20) –July 4, 1910(Died) Stephen Johnson Field Associate Justice California newly created seat (Acclamation)–December 1, 1897(Retired) John Marshall Harlan Associate Justice Kentucky David Davis (Acclamation) –October 14, 1911(Died) Horace Gray Associate Justice Massachusetts Nathan Clifford (51–5) –September 15, 1902(Died) Samuel Blatchford Associate Justice New York Ward Hunt (Acclamation) –July 7, 1893(Died) Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar Associate Justice Mississippi William Burnham Woods (32–28) –January 23, 1893(Died) David Josiah Brewer Associate Justice Kansas Stanley Matthews (53–11) –March 28, 1910(Died) Henry Billings Brown Associate Justice Michigan Samuel Freeman Miller (Acclamation) –May 28, 1906(Retired)

Notable Cases in 144 U.S. United States v. Ballin United States v. Ballin, 144 U.S. 1 (1892), is a Supreme Court decision discussing the constitutional definition of "a quorum to do business" in Congress. The Court, analyzing the constitutional limitations on the United States Senate and House of Representatives when determining their rules of proceedings, held that it fell within the powers of the House and Senate to establish their own rules for verifying whether a majority of their members is present, as required for a quorum under Article I of the Constitution.

Lau Ow Bew v. United States Lau Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U.S. 47 (1892), is a case occurring at the beginning of the era of Chinese Exclusion as well as the formation of the United States courts of appeals. The case set precedents for the interpretation of the rights of Chinese merchants and the jurisdiction of the new courts. The Supreme Court's ruling relied heavily the Burlingame Treaty of 1868, the Angell Treaty of 1880, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the amendments to the Act in 1884, as well as the Evarts Act of 1891. The case helped to establish not only the rights of the Chinese merchant class, but also informed future cases about the power of the Circuit Courts of Appeal as well as the perception of Chinese immigrants.

Citation style

Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.

The Judiciary Act of 1891 created the United States Courts of Appeals and reassigned the jurisdiction of most routine appeals from the district and circuit courts to these appellate courts. The Act created nine new courts that were originally known as the "United States Circuit Courts of Appeals." The new courts had jurisdiction over most appeals of lower court decisions. The Supreme Court could review either legal issues that a court of appeals certified or decisions of court of appeals by writ of certiorari.

Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions. "# Cir." = United States Court of Appeals e.g., "3d Cir." = United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit "C.C.D." = United States Circuit Court for the District of . . . e.g.,"C.C.D.N.J." = United States Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey "D." = United States District Court for the District of . . . e.g.,"D. Mass." = United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts "E." = Eastern; "M." = Middle; "N." = Northern; "S." = Southern; "W." = Western e.g.,"C.C.S.D.N.Y." = United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York e.g.,"M.D. Ala." = United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama "Ct. Cl." = United States Court of Claims The abbreviation of a state's name alone indicates the highest appellate court in that state's judiciary at the time. e.g.,"Pa." = Supreme Court of Pennsylvania e.g.,"Me." = Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

List of cases in volume 144 U.S.

Case Name Page & year Opinion of the Court Concurring opinion(s) Dissenting opinion(s) Lower Court Disposition United States v. Ballin 1 (1892) Brewer none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. reversed Ansonia B. & C. Co. v. Electrical S. Co. 11 (1892) Brown none none C.C.D. Conn. affirmed Larkin v. Upton 19 (1892) Brewer none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Mont. affirmed United States v. Wilson 24 (1892) Lamar none none Ct. Cl. affirmed Heinze v. Arthur's Ex'rs 28 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. reversed Liebenroth v. Robertson 35 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. reversed Wilson v. Seligman 41 (1892) Gray none none C.C.E.D. Mo. affirmed Lau Ow Bew v. United States 47 (1892) Fuller none none 9th Cir. reversed Butler v. National Home 64 (1892) Harlan none Brown C.C.D. Mass. reversed Kent v. Lake Superior et al. Co. 75 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.E.D.N.Y. affirmed In re Heath 92 (1892) Fuller none none Sup. Ct. D.C. dismissed Gordon v. Third Nat'l Bank 97 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.N.D. Ala. affirmed Camden v. Stuart 104 (1892) Brown none none C.C.D.W. Va. affirmed Lacassagne v. Chapuis 119 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.W.D. La. affirmed Tripp v. Santa Rosa St. R.R. Co. 126 (1892) Fuller none none Cal. dismissed Haley v. Breeze 130 (1892) Fuller none none Colo. dismissed Southern K. Ry. Co. v. Briscoe 133 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.W.D. Ark. affirmed Dillman v. Hastings 136 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.N.D. Ohio reversed Bedon v. Davie 142 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.D.S.C. affirmed United States v. Budd 154 (1892) Brewer none Brown C.C.D. Wash. affirmed City of Brenham v. German Am. Bank I 173 (1892) Blatchford none Harlan C.C.W.D. Tex. reversed Rice v. Sanger 197 (1892) Fuller none none Kan. dismissed Sherman v. Grinnell 198 (1892) Fuller none none New York City Ct. dismissed Columbia et al. R.R. Co. v. Hawthorne 202 (1892) Gray none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Wash. reversed Red River C. Co. v. Sully 209 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.N.D. Tex. affirmed Missouri ex rel. Quincy et al. R.R. Co. v. Harris 210 (1892) Fuller none none Mo. dismissed Glaspell v. Northern Pacific Railroad Co. 211 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.D.N.D. reversed Pope Mfg. Co. v. Gormully I 224 (1892) Brown none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed Pope Mfg. Co. v. Gormully II 238 (1892) Brown none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed Pope Mfg. Co. v. Gormully III 248 (1892) Brown none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed Pope Mfg. Co. v. Gormully IV 254 (1892) Brown none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed McLane v. King 260 (1892) Brewer none none C.C.W.D. Tex. affirmed Logan v. United States 263 (1892) Gray none Lamar C.C.N.D. Tex. reversed United States v. Sanges 310 (1892) Gray none none C.C.N.D. Ga. dismissed O'Neil v. Vermont 323 (1892) Blatchford none Field Vt. dismissed The Blue Jacket 371 (1892) Blatchford none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Wash. affirmed Waterman v. Banks 394 (1892) Harlan none none C.C.N.D. Cal. reversed Porter v. Banks 407 (1892) per curiam none none C.C.N.D. Cal. reversed Grand Trunk Ry. Co. v. Ives 408 (1892) Lamar none none C.C.E.D. Mich. affirmed Keator L. Co. v. Thompson 434 (1892) Harlan none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed Hartford L.A. Ins. Co. v. Unsell 439 (1892) Harlan none none C.C.E.D. Mo. affirmed Dodge v. Tulleys 451 (1892) Brewer none none C.C.D. Neb. affirmed Northern Pacific Railroad v. Ellis 458 (1892) Fuller none none Wis. dismissed Northern Pacific Railroad v. Amato 465 (1892) Blatchford none Brewer 2d Cir. affirmed Chateaugay O. & I. Co. v. Blake 476 (1892) Brewer none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. affirmed Belford v. Scribner 488 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed Smith v. Gale 509 (1892) Brown none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Dakota affirmed Torrence v. Shedd 527 (1892) Gray none none C.C.N.D. Ill. reversed Sharon v. Tucker 533 (1892) Field none none Sup. Ct. D.C. reversed Stellwagen v. Tucker 548 (1892) per curiam none none Sup. Ct. D.C. reversed City of Brenham v. German Am. Bank II 549 (1892) per curiam none none C.C.W.D. Tex. rehearing denied Coosaw M. Co. v. South Carolina 550 (1892) Harlan none none C.C.D.S.C. affirmed Kellam v. Keith 568 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.D. Kan. reversed Macon Cnty. 568 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.E.D. Mo. affirmed National E. Bank v. Peters 570 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.E.D. Va. dismissed Brown v. Massachusetts 573 (1892) Gray none none Mass. Super. Ct. dismissed Windett v. Union M.L. Ins. Co. 581 (1892) Gray none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed Crawford v. Neal 585 (1892) Fuller none none C.C.D. Or. affirmed Meyerheim v. Robertson 601 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. affirmed Robertson v. Salomon 603 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. reversed Nesbit v. Riverside Ind. Dist. 610 (1892) Brewer none none C.C.N.D. Iowa affirmed Crotty v. Union M.L. Ins. Co. 621 (1892) Brewer none none C.C.N.D. Cal. affirmed White v. Rankin 628 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.N.D. Cal. reversed Pendleton v. Russell 640 (1892) Field none none N.Y. Sup. Ct. affirmed Sage v. Louisiana Bd. of Liquidation 647 (1892) Field none none La. dismissed Adams v. Louisiana Bd. of Liquidation 651 (1892) Field none none La. dismissed Roberts v. Lewis 653 (1892) Gray none none C.C.D. Neb. reversed Kendall v. San Juan S.M. Co. 658 (1892) Field none none Colo. affirmed Gregory v. Boston S.D. & T. Co. 665 (1892) Harlan none none C.C.D. Mass. decree modified Underwood v. Metropolitan Nat'l Bank 669 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.W.D. Mo. affirmed United States v. Eaton 677 (1892) Blatchford none none C.C.D. Mass. certification

Notes and references

External links Case reports in volume 144 from Library of Congress Case reports in volume 144 from Court Listener Case reports in volume 144 from the Caselaw Access Project of Harvard Law School Case reports in volume 144 from Google Scholar Case reports in volume 144 from Justia Case reports in volume 144 from Open Jurist Website of the United States Supreme Court United States Courts website about the Supreme Court National Archives, Records of the Supreme Court of the United States American Bar Association, How Does the Supreme Court Work? The Supreme Court Historical Society