Summary

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Eddy v. Lafayette — Opinion of the Court

The circuit court of appeals, while saying that the better, though not the invariable, practice, is to leave the allowance of interest, in cases of tort, to the discretion of the jury, regarded it as quite evident from the record that in point of fact the jury did not allow interest, but based their verdict entirely upon the number of tons of hay destroyed, at the market value per ton.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Eddy v. Lafayette — Opinion of the Court

The court below thought the rule in Arkansas is that mere defects in the service of process may be waived by appearance after a motion has been overruled to set aside the service, in cases where the court has jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the controversy, and the defect in the service only impairs the jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Eddy v. Lafayette — Opinion of the Court

Hailey, in procuring the hay in question to be cut and put up, was acting illegally, or was in any wise a trespasser. And the statute above quoted implies that citizens of the Nation might cut hay without limit from the common pasturage, as it forbids only noncitizen traders from cutting hay from the common pasturage; and we agree with the court below that there is nothing in the present record that would authorize us to say that the hay was gathered on the public domain without license.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature