The Federal Reporter (Annotated), Volume 167: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States. April-May, 1909. Page: 997
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
PUNDT V. PENDLETON.
ma facie case of preference, it then became the duty of the claimant to
prove that the loan was impressed with a trust, and that the money
could be followed, either with precision, or at least into a mass from
which it might be extracted with reasonable certainty.
The order of the referee is affirmed.
PUNDT v. PENDLETON, Jailer.
(District Court, N. D. Georgia, N. W. D. February 11, 1900.)
1. UNITED STATES ( 3*)-AUTHORITY OVER PROPERTY ACQUIRED WITHIN STATES
The land on which Ft. Oglethorpe is located in Georgia, being a part of
that acquired by the United States for a National Military Park with
the consent of the State Legislature, which ceded jurisdiction of the lands
and roads therein, said fort being used as a military post, is within the
provision of the Constitution of the United States, art. 1, 8, giving ex-
clusive jurisdiction over forts, etc., to Congress, and neither the state nor
other local authorities have power to interfere with any instrumentalities
necessary to the proper use of such location as a military post.
[Ed. Note.-For other cases, see United States, Cent. Dig. 1 3; Dec.
Dig. 1 .*]
2 ARMY AND NAVY ( 27*)-TEAMSTER IN QUARTERMASTER'S DEPARTMENT-LIA'
BILITY TO WORK ROAD UNDER STATE LAW.
A teamster in the permanent employment of the Quartermaster's De-
partment of the United States army, stationed at the military post of
Ft. Oglethorpe in Georgia, and under articles 1 and 780 of the army regu-
lations required to obey strictly and execute promptly the orders of his
superiors, cannot be required by the local officers of the state to appear
and work on the roads outside of the fort and reservation, and his deten-
tion in jail for a failure to perform such road work is a violation of
his rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
[Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Army and Navy, Dec. Dig. 27.*]
3. JUDGMENT (% 828*)-CONCLUSIVENEsS OF ADJUDICATION-DISMISSAL.
A judgment of a state court dismissing a writ of certiorari to review a
sentence of imprisonment for want of notice, and not on the merits, is
not a bar to a subsequent proceeding by the petitioners for release oa ai
writ of habeas corpus.
[Ed. Note-For other cases, see Judgment, Cent. Dig. f 1504-1500;
Dec. Dig. 9 828.*!
4. HABEAS CORPUs (f 45*)-FEDERAL COURTS-STATE PRISONERS-DISCRETION TO
A federal court will discharge from imprisonment by a state, on a writ
of habeas corpus, a teamster in the employment of the Quartermastex's
Department of the army, where such imprisonment is in violation of the
Constitution and laws of the United States and prevents the performance
of the duties of his employment.
[Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Habeas Corpus, Cent. Dig. 38-45;
Dec. Dig. 1 45;* Courts, Cent. Dig. 1376-1385.*]
John W. Henley, for complainant.
William E. Mann, for defendant.
*For other ases see same topic & I N mnaE in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep'r Indexes
Here’s what’s next.
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter (Annotated), Volume 167: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States. April-May, 1909., legislative document, 1909; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38213/m1/1007/: accessed February 22, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.