Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

117 U.S. 271

29 L. Ed. 898

Boardman v. Toffey

Supreme Court of the United States

Argued March 11, 1886.

Decided March 15, 1886.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1886-03-15

<p>ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR ifHE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY.</p> <p>The case is stated in the opinion of the court.</p>

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““Where issues of fact are submitted to the circuit court, and the finding is general, nothing is open to review, * * * except the rulings of the circuit court in the progress of the trial; and the phrase, ‘rulings of the court in the progress of the trial,’ does not include the general finding of the circuit court, nor the conclusions of the circuit court embodied in such general finding.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Bowden v. Burnham

Relies on Royall · Norris v. Jackson · Martinton v. Fairbanks

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · 9–0 · Decided 1886-03-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 368 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Daye v. Attorney General of New York (1982), Fleischmann Const Co v. United States (1926)

238 federal appellate · 38 district · 3 state decisions

44018861890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR ifHE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY.

¶2If the trial below is by the court without a jury, and the findings of facts are general, only such rulings of the court in the progress of the trial can be reviewed as are presented by a bill of exceptions.

¶3The case is stated in the opinion of the court.

¶4*272■ Mr. James B. Vredenburgh for plaintiff in error submitted on his brief.

¶5Mr. Preston Stevenson for defendant in er-ror.

¶6Me. Chief Justice "Waite

¶7delivered the opinion of the court.

¶8This judgment is affirmed. The trial was by the court without a jury and there is no special finding of facts · Case Law">special finding of facts. The only questions presented by the bill of exceptions which we can consider are those which relate to the refusal of the court to allow certain interrogatories to be put to witnesses on the stand, and in these we find no error. The general finding prevents all inquiry by us into the special facts and conclusions of law on which that finding rests. Norris v. Jackson, 9 Wall. 125; Cooper v. Omohundro, 19 Wall. 65, 69; Martinton v. Fairbanks, 112 U. S. 670, 673.

¶9Affirmed.

/117/us/271 · .json · Public domain