Skip to main content
· 5/18/1896

Bacon v. Texas

Citations

  • 163 U.S. 207
  • 16 S. Ct. 1023
  • 41 L. Ed. 132
  • 1896 U.S. LEXIS 2259

Syllabus

<p>In this case application was made by the defendants below, after judgment, to the Supreme Court of Texas for a writ of error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the second district for the purpose of reviewing the judgment of that court, and the application was denied. JSeld, that this court has jurisdiction to reSxamine the judgment on writ of error to the Court of Civil Appeals.</p> <p>In case of a change of phraseology in an article in a state constitution, it is for the state courts to determine whether the change calls for a change of construction.</p> <p>Where there are two grounds for the judgment of a state court, one only of which involves a Federal question, and the other is broad enough to maintain a judgment sought to be reviewed, this court will not look into the Federal question.</p> <p>When a state courthas based its decision on a local or state question, and this court in consequence finds it unnecessary to decide a Federal question raised by the record, the logical course is to dismiss the writ of error.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “[A] court is under no obligation to 8 See United States v. Castleman, 572 U.S. 157, 174 (2014) (Scalia, J., concurring

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Peckham

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.