Grayson v. Virginia, 1 L. Ed. 619 (1796). · Go Syfert
Grayson v. Virginia, 1 L. Ed. 619 (1796). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“he law directs that in cases of appeal, part shall be decided by one tribunal, and part by another; the facts by the court below, and the law by this court. such a distribution of jurisdiction has long been established in england.”
54 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 22 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Aspen Skiing Co. v. Cherrett (In Re Cherrett) (ca9, 2017-10-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1902 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1902 1964 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Aspen Skiing Co. v. Cherrett (In Re Cherrett)
9th Cir. · 2017 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
he law directs that in cases of appeal, part shall be decided by one tribunal, and part by another; the facts by the court below, and the law by this court. such a distribution of jurisdiction has long been established in england.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rodriguez v. West Coast Aircraft Maintenance
D. Ariz. · 2019 · confidence medium
Walden, 571 U.S. at 284 ; Axiom Foods, Inc., 874 F.3d at 1068 . “[A] plaintiff[s’] 1 contacts with the forum State cannot be ‘decisive in determining whether the defendant’s 2 due process rights are violated[.]’” Walden, 571 U.S. at 279 (quoting Rush v. Savchuk, 444 3 U.S. 320, 332 (1980)). 4 The Ninth Circuit has created and implemented a three-prong test to determine if a 5 court has specific jurisdiction over a defendant.
cited Cited "see" (PC) Gonzalez v. Newsom
E.D. Cal. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Whitley, 475 3 U.S. at 320-21.
cited Cited "see" (PC) Green v. McFarlane
E.D. Cal. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Whitley, 475 3 U.S. at 320-21.
cited Cited "see" In re Finks
W.D. Va. · 1889 · signal: see · confidence high
See Grayson v. Virginia, 3 Dall. 320 , decided in 1796, where the court said:.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Grayson Versus Virginia
Supreme Court of the United States.
Aug 12, 1796.
1 L. Ed. 619
By the Court

:—After a particular examination of the powers veiled in this Court, in caufes of Equity, as well as in caufcs of Admiralty and Maritime jurifdidlion, w>e colled! a general rule for .the .government of- out proceedings; with a diferetionary, authority, however, to deviate from that rule, where its application wou’dbe injurious or iinpradücabio. The general rule preferibes to us an adoption of that practice,.whiqb is founded on the cufíoro and ufage ofCourls of Admiralty arid Equity, conilituted on fimilar principles; but ftill, It is thought, that we are alfa autbórifcd to, make fuch deviations as are ne-ceffar'y to adapt the procefs and rules'of the Court to the pecu- • iiarcircumftances of this country, fubjedl to the interpolation, alteration, and controul, of the Legiilature' * .

W e have* therefore, agreed to malee the following general Orders; and the Cdunfel, in the prefent cafe, will take his meafures accordingly. • . '

I.. Ordered That when procefs at Common Law, dr in Equity, ihall iffue- againft a State, the fame íhall be ferved upon the Governor, or Chief Executive Magiilrate, and the " Attorney-General, of fuch State.

[*321] 2. Ordered, That procefs of fubpcena iffuing opt of this Court, in any fuit in Equity, fhall be ferved on the Defendant fixty days before the return day of the faid procefs : and, further, that if the Defendant, on fuch fervice of the fubpcena, (ball not appear alt the return day contained therein, the complainant fhall be at liberty to proceed ex parte.

Lewis the.n obferved, that the fubpcena in this caf-, had been iffued on the fame principles j but as the orders could only operate in futuro, he thought it beft to withdraw his ¡notiomfer a difiringas, and to pray that an alias fubpcena might be awarded ; which was, accordingly, done.

*

Seethe Judicial Act, f. 14. The Act to regulate Procc.%s.ih the Í'ediíra'Courts, iV ». '