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.
UNITED STATES v. PHILLIPS, 1887 — 121 U.S. 254 · caselaw · US
General
UNITED STATES v. PHILLIPS
121 U.S. 25430 L. Ed. 914·Supreme Court of the United States·1887
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
UNITED STATES v. PHILLIPS.
error to the circuit court of the united states for the WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS.
Argued April 4, 1887.
Decided April 11, 1887.
Notice of a writ of error, given in open court at the same term the judgment is rendered, is not the equivalent of citation.
The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Maury for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendants in. error. ■
[MAJORITY — Mr. Chief Justice Waite]
Mr. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.'
-In this case no citation was ever issued, and the defendants in error do not appear. Notice of a writ of error, given in open court at the same term the judgment is rendered, is - not' the equivalent of the citation required by § 999 of the Revised Statutes. In this respect writs of error.differ from appeals taken in open court.
The writ of error is dismissed.