ROSE'S NOTES

COMPLETELY REVISED EDITION

1917

Showing the present value as authority of all cases in this volume of reports as disclosed by all subsequent citations in the Federal and State courts, including

with duplicate references to Am. Dec., Am. Rep., Am. St. Rep., Ann. Cas. (American and English), L.R.A., N. C. C. A., and the Reporter System.

NOTES

ON THE

UNITED STATES REPORTS.

X WHEATON.

10 Wheat. 1-50, 60 L. Ed. 253, WAYMAN v. SOUTHARD.

Supreme Court has jurisdiction when case is adjourned from circuit of only those points on which judges were divided.

Approved in Ward v. Chamberlain, 2 Black, 435, 17 L. Ed. 323, where court refused to pass on questions not involved in points certified; dissenting opinion in Dow v. Johnson, 100 U. S. 173, 25 L. Ed. 638, arguing that court did not have jurisdiction except as to specific points on which judges were divided; Paving Co. v. Molitor, 113 U. S. 616, 28 L. Ed. 1108, 5 Sup. Ct. 621, denying jurisdiction where certificate presented mixed questions of law and fact and involved merits of controversy; dissenting opinion in Ex parte Crane, 5 Pet. 206, 8 L. Ed. 98, to point that jurisdiction of court over causes sent up on certificate of division should be strictly construed; Baker v. Biddle, 1 Bald. 406, Fed. Cas. 764, arguendo.

Definiteness of question to be certified. Note, 31 L. R. A. 395.

Under general grant of power to carry enumerated powers into execution, Congress can make laws to carry Federal judgments into execution.

Cited in Knox Co. v. Aspinwall, 24 How. 384, 16 L. Ed. 738, holding Congress could pass laws authorizing Federal courts to issue mandamus to compel county officers to levy a tax for purpose of satisfying judgment of said court against the county; Riggs v. Johnson Co., 6 Wall. 187, 18 L. Ed. 773, holding Congress could make laws authorizing Federal courts to compel defendant county to levy tax to satisfy judgment of such court, notwithstanding injunction from State court to prevent such levy; United States v. Drennan, Hempst. 325, Fed. Cas. 14,992, to point that Congress having exercised its power to make laws carrying into execution Federal court judgments, United States could proceed to satisfy judgment in its favor against deceased's estate, notwithstanding local probate law; Bank v. Thompson, 173 Ill. 599, 64 Am. St. Rep. 140, 50 N. E. 1090, holding Con(185)

gress had power to adopt State laws relating to process and executions, and adoption of Illinois law, making lien of judgment of State courts coextensive with their jurisdictions, made lien of judgments of Federal courts in Illinois coextensive with their jurisdictions; Thayer v. Hedges, 23 Ind. 146, upholding power of Congress to provide for issue of legal tender treasury notes; Lafayette etc. R. R. Co. v. Geiger, 34 Ind. 213, holding, where State legislature has power to authorize counties to subscribe for stock, it has power by implication to provide means for raising money therefor; Polk v. Douglas, 6 Yerg. 211, to effect that Federal government had exclusive authority to regulate process of Federal courts.

Jurisdiction of court over cause does not terminate with the judgment, but continues until its satisfaction.

Approved in D. B. Martin Co. v. Shannonhouse, 203 Fed. 519, holding that where money held in custody of clerk of Federal court under its judgment, it could not be attached under writ issued out of State court; Ferriday v. Middlesex Banking Co., 118 Ala. (790), 43 South. 411, and Please v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Co., 228 Fed. 279, both holding jurisdiction of Federal court continued until decree was satisfied; American Shipbuilding Co. v. Whitney, 190 Fed. 110, holding that Federal court had no jurisdiction to enjoin taking deposition in State court; Central Vermont Ry. Co. v. Redmond, 189 Fed. 688, holding that where public service commission had made order, and appeal taken to State court, which affirmed order, Federal court had no jurisdiction to enjoin commissioners; Union Pac. R. Co. v. Flynn, 180 Fed. 569, holding that over action brought in Federal court to review proceedings in State court, Federal court cannot take jurisdiction; United States v. Dolla, 177 Fed. 104, 21 Ann. Cas. 665, 100 C. C. A. 521, holding that word "case" is used in act March 3, 1891, does not include proceeding for naturalization and Circuit Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction to review it; Collin County Nat. Bank v. Hughes, 152 Fed. 415, 81 C. C. A. 556, holding that court rendering judgment has power to revive it; Security Trust Co. v. Union Trust Co., 134 Fed. 302, Rev. Stats., § 720, prohibiting restraining of State court proceedings, prohibits restraint of execution sale; Corbitt v. Farmers' Bank, 114 Fed. 604, holding money paid into court pending litigation is not subject to attachment from other courts; Phelps v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Assn., 112 Fed. 458, holding petition, after return of execution nulla bona, stating that life insurance premiums were due defendant and payable out of the State, and praying for appointment of receiver to collect premiums, was not commencement of new suit; Leathe v. Thomas, 97 Fed. 138, 139, holding an order enjoining sheriff from proceeding with collection of execution lawfully issued is within prohibition of Rev. Stats., § 720; Hopkins v. Levandowski, 250 Ill. 374, 95 N. E. 497, holding that where under statute municipal court had jurisdiction, but no provisions were made for proceedings after judgment, writ of restitution should issue; School Directors Dist. No. 153 v. School Directors Dist. 154, 232 Ill. 325, 83 N. E. 850, holding power to tax not