SMITH v. NAPHTALY, 169 U.S. 365 (1898)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
SMITH v. NAPHTALY, 169 U.S. 365 (1898)169 U.S. 365
SMITH vsrv.
NAPHTALY.
No. 181.
February 28, 1898
Henry F. Crane, for appellant.
A. T. Britton and A. R. Browne, for appellee.
Mr. Justice PECKHAM delivered the opinion of the court.
In this case counsel for the appellant concedes that if the
court should hold that the sale of the land mentioned in the patent
involved in the foregoing case (18 Sup. Ct. 354) were a valid sale,
then the judgment in this case should be affirmed. As we do so
hold, the judgment herein is therefore affirmed.
Opinions
No. 181.
February 28, 1898 Henry F. Crane, for appellant. A. T. Britton and A. R. Browne, for appellee. Mr. Justice PECKHAM delivered the opinion of the court. In this case counsel for the appellant concedes that if the court should hold that the sale of the land mentioned in the patent involved in the foregoing case (18 Sup. Ct. 354) were a valid sale, then the judgment in this case should be affirmed. As we do so hold, the judgment herein is therefore affirmed.
U.S. Supreme Court
SMITH v. NAPHTALY, 169 U.S. 365 (1898) 169 U.S. 365 SMITH vsrv. NAPHTALY.No. 181.
February 28, 1898 Henry F. Crane, for appellant. A. T. Britton and A. R. Browne, for appellee. Mr. Justice PECKHAM delivered the opinion of the court. In this case counsel for the appellant concedes that if the court should hold that the sale of the land mentioned in the patent involved in the foregoing case (18 Sup. Ct. 354) were a valid sale, then the judgment in this case should be affirmed. As we do so hold, the judgment herein is therefore affirmed.
Search This Case
