It’s the 12 Days of Ballotpedia! Your gift powers the trusted, unbiased information voters need heading into 2026. Donate now!

MATTHEWS v. DENSMORE AND OTHERS (1883)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 14:59, 23 April 2024 by Matt Latourelle (contribs) (historical scotus page set)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
MATTHEWS v. DENSMORE AND OTHERS
Term: 1883
Important Dates
Argued: October 18, 1883
Decided: November 12, 1883
Outcome
Reversed
Vote
9-0
Majority
Samuel BlatchfordJoseph BradleyStephen Johnson FieldHorace GrayJohn Marshall HarlanStanley MatthewsSamuel Freeman MillerMorrison WaiteWilliam Burnham Woods

MATTHEWS v. DENSMORE AND OTHERS is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on November 12, 1883. The case was argued before the court on October 18, 1883.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower court. The case originated from the Michigan State Trial Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1880s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Waite Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Economic Activity - Liability, governmental: tort or contract actions by or against government or governmental officials other than defense of criminal actions brought under a civil rights action.
  • Petitioner: Owner, landlord, or claimant to ownership, fee interest, or possession of land as well as chattels
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: Governmental employee or job applicant
  • Respondent state: United States
  • Citation: 109 U.S. 216
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Writ of error
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: Morrison Waite
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Samuel Freeman Miller

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes