|
|
Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 (1906)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 (1906)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 202 U.S. 313, click here.
Ortega v. Lara No. 230 Argued April 17, 18, 1906 Decided May 21, 1906 202 U.S. 339
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COUIT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO
Syllabus
Where jurisdiction of a writ of error to review a judgment of the District Court of the United States for Porto Rico depends on amount, the judgment itself is the test, and it is insufficient if for $5,000 and costs although it carries interest.
Whenever political and legislative power over territory are transferred from another nation to the United States, the laws of the country transferred, unless inconsistent with provisions of the Constitution and laws of the United States applicable thereto, continue in force until abrogated or changed by or under the authority of the United States, and this general rule of law was applied to Porto Rico by the Foraker Act of April 12, 1900, and that act also provided how such laws should be altered or repealed by the Legislature of Porto Rico.
Article 44 of the Code of Porto Rico limiting recovery in cases of breach of promise to the expenses of injured party incurred by reason of the promised marriage was a law of Porto Rico, and not of the United States and was subject to repeal by the legislature of Porto Rico, and, having been so repealed prior to the breach alleged in this case, a writ of error from this Court cannot be maintained on the ground that the ruling of the district court that the recovery was not limited to such expenses was a denial of a right claimed under a law of the United States.
The District Court of the United States for Porto Rico has jurisdiction when the parties on both sides are subjects of the King of Spain.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 (1906) in 202 U.S. 339 202 U.S. 341. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=P1KFYAF37ENY3UY.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 (1906), in 202 U.S. 339, page 202 U.S. 341. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=P1KFYAF37ENY3UY.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 (1906). cited in 1906, 202 U.S. 339, pp.202 U.S. 341. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=P1KFYAF37ENY3UY.
|