Porto Rico v. Emmanuel

Citations

• 235 U.S. 251
• 35 S. Ct. 33
• 59 L. Ed. 215
• 1914 U.S. LEXIS 1019

Syllabus

<p>Under § 35 of the Foraker Act of April 12, 1900, the jurisdiction of this court on appeals from the District Court of the United States for Porto Rico is confined to determining whether .the facfy 'found by that court support its judgment and whether there was material and prejudicial error in the admission or rejection of evidence manifested by exceptions properly certified.</p> <p>In such a case, in the absence of a bill of exceptions, questions of admissibility of evidence are excluded and the review is confined to what appears upon the face of the pleadings and the findings. Rosaly v. Graham, 225 U. S. 584.</p> <p>Under the Territorial Practice Act of 1874 which governed appeals. ' to this court from Porto Rico taken under § 35 ol the Foraker Act, proceedings for review in this court in actions- at law as well as in •equitable actions'are by appeal and not by writ of error unless, there-was a jury trial.</p> <p>The government of Porto Rico is of such a nature as to come within the general rulé exempting a government, sovereign in its attributes,, from being sued without its consent, Porto Rico v. Rosaly, 227 U. S. 270; but in this ease, qucere whether Porto Rico fairly raised the question of immunity or whether it did not consent to litigate the case on the merits. ■</p> <p>An action against the government of Porto Rico for the wrongful act of the Treasurer in registering private property as part of the public domain and preventing the collection of rents by the owner, is an action for fault or for negligence mentioned in § 1803, Civil Code, and the one year period of prescription obtains under § 1869, Civil Code of Porto Rico.</p> <p>Quaere, whether the period of prescription under § 1869, Civil Code of Porto Rico, begins to rup from the time of knowledge of the wrongful act or from the time of knowledge of the damage consequent thereon.</p>