Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
LOGAN v. PATRICK, 1809 — 9 U.S. 288 · caselaw · US
General
LOGAN v. PATRICK
9 U.S. 2885 Cranch 288·Supreme Court of the United States·1809
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
LOGAN v. PATRICK.
The circuit mctioq^in1 * * a suit iii equity, '£edingJs upon A judgment at dm same ""ar tí«9,SaSthough the ^uhpoiiia the^defendant ont of- the. the court'"sits, '
THIS was a case certified from the circuit court f°r the 7th circuit and district of Kentucky, in which the judges below differed in opinion upon the flowing questions :
Whether the complainant, (Logan,) who is a citi¿en .of the state of Kentucky, .and is so stated in the pleadings, can maintain this suit, in this court, against the defendant, who is a citizen and inhabitant of the state of Virginia, and is so stated in the pleadings, upon the following case : John Patrick obtained, in this court a judgment in ejectment against David Logan, who filed a bill in equity against him to be relieved against the judgment, and to compel a conveyance of the land, and obtained an injunction to stay proceedings-on the judgment; biit the subpoena was not'served in the district of Kentucky, Can this,court entertain jurisdiction of the cause ? If not, does the defendant’s answering the bill, without insisting upon the - objection that the' process’ was not served upon him in the district of Kentucky, authorize the court to entertain the cause ?
[MAJORITY]
The'Court, upon the fiTst opening of the case, said there .could be no doubt of the jurisdiction of the court below, and ordered it to be certified accordingly.