From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bradley v. Lightcap

U.S.
May 31, 1904
195 U.S. 24 (1904)

Opinion

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.

No. 306.

Argued April 21, 1904. Decided May 31, 1904.

This case having been decided by the state court on the authority of its own decision in a case between the same parties which has been reversed by this court, this judgment is also reversed on the authority of Bradley v. Lightcap, ante, p. 1.

THE facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Mr. John S. Miller, with whom Mr. Merritt Starr and Mr. W.W. Hammond were on the brief, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. George W. Wall and Mr. E.A. Wallace, with whom Mr. Lyman Lacey, Jr., was on the brief, for defendant in error.


After the decision reported 186 Ill. 510, Mrs. Bradley filed her bill in equity in the Circuit Court of Fulton County, Illinois, to quiet her title to the land in controversy in the action in ejectment and for appropriate relief. The bill was dismissed on demurrer and Mrs. Bradley carried the case to the Supreme Court of Illinois, which affirmed the decree below. Bradley v. Lightcap, 202 Ill. 154, April 24, 1903. Three of the members of the court dissented. The opinion of the Supreme Court proceeded on the strength of the decisions in 186 Ill. 510, and 201 Ill. 511.

As we have reversed the judgment in the prior case, this case must take the same course.

Decree reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with our opinion in No. 243.


Summaries of

Bradley v. Lightcap

U.S.
May 31, 1904
195 U.S. 24 (1904)
Case details for

Bradley v. Lightcap

Case Details

Full title:BRADLEY v . LIGHTCAP. No. 2

Court:U.S.

Date published: May 31, 1904

Citations

195 U.S. 24 (1904)

Citing Cases

Davis v. Boston M.R. Co.

acted within its constitutional authority in the selection of a given subject of taxation, "the taxing power…

United States v. Gill

But that suggested differentiation, in the light of what has now been said, seems to us more fanciful than…