|
Sheldon v. Sill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
Sheldon v. Sill, 49 U.S. 8 How. 441 441 (1850) ... to said Sill, the complainant below, who was then and still is a citizen of New York. ... US Supreme Court Center> US Supreme Court Cases & Opinions> Volume 49 > SHELDON V. SILL, 49 U. S. 441 (1850)
|
|
Sheldon v. Sill is an important decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which limited the amount of discretion Congress has in enacting legislation to limit the types of Cases that may be heard by the lower federal courts.
|
|
Hastings, an MI citizen, assigns a promissory note to Sill, an NY citizen; Sill files suit against Sheldon, an MI citizen, in circuit court to recover on a promissory note; § 11 of the Judiciary Act prohibits suits on an assigned note unless the first bearer could get jurisdiction to sue;
|
|
Sheldon v Sill 49 US 441 1850 was a ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that while Congress may not limit the subjects the Supreme Court may hear the Constitution does not so restrain it where lower courts are concerned Article III of the United States Constitution vests the Judicial ...
|
|
Sheldon v. Sill = general rule. 1. Rejects literal reading of Art. III. 2. Art. III neither creates lower federal courts nor requires Congress to vest such ...
|
|
Sheldon v. Sill. Facts: Sheldon owed money to Hastings. Both Sheldon and Hastings were Michigan residents. Hastings assigned the debt to Sill, a New York resident. Sill sued in federal court under diversity jurisdiction. ... Sill, the complainant below, ... In the case of Turner v. Bank of North America, it was contended,
|
|
Sheldon v. Sill, pp. 168-73; Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., pp. 174-95 ... b. Sheldon v. Sill = general rule ... e. Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.: Not a jurisdiction-stripping case, but implicates similar Art. III themes...
|
|
Federal Courts Lecture Outline - Spring 2009; Professor Lee ... b. Sheldon v. Sill = general rule ... e. Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.: Not a jurisdiction-stripping case, but implicates similar Art. III themes...
|
|
For example, in the earliest case on the issue, Sheldon v. Sill,51 the Court upheld a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that prohibited diversity jurisdiction from being created by the assignment of a debt.52 Under this principle, when there has been an assignment, a federal court may take the case under its...
|