underhill v. hernandez (1897) in 1892, general hernandez

2
Underhill v. Hernandez (1897) In 1892, General Hernandez -- a military leader of the revolutionary Crespo faction -- entered Bolivar and forcefully required George F. Underhill (U.S. citizen) to remain and keep the waterworks (which he had built) functioning. Underhill then brought an action for damages caused by the wrongful detention and alleged assaults and affronts. How did the court gain jurisdiction over General Hernandez? Would the detention of Underhill be viewed as a violation of his human rights today? What is the holding of the Court, and why? What should Underhill do next? Underhill v. Hernandez (1897) In 1892, General Hernandez -- a military leader of the revolutionary Crespo faction -- entered Bolivar and forcefully required George F. Underhill (U.S. citizen) to remain and keep the waterworks (which he had built) functioning. Underhill then brought an action for damages caused by the wrongful detention and alleged assaults and affronts. How did the court gain jurisdiction over General Hernandez? Would the detention of Underhill be viewed as a violation of his human rights today? What is the holding of the Court, and why? What should Underhill do next? University of Hawaii School of Law Library - Jon Van Dyke Archives Collection

Upload: others

Post on 01-Dec-2021

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Underhill v. Hernandez (1897)

In 1892, General Hernandez -- a military leader of the revolutionary Crespo faction -­entered Bolivar and forcefully required George F. Underhill (U.S. citizen) to remain and keep the waterworks (which he had built) functioning.

Underhill then brought an action for damages caused by the wrongful detention and alleged assaults and affronts.

How did the court gain jurisdiction over General Hernandez?

Would the detention of Underhill be viewed as a violation of his human rights today?

What is the holding of the Court, and why?

What should Underhill do next?

Underhill v. Hernandez (1897)

In 1892, General Hernandez -- a military leader of the revolutionary Crespo faction -­entered Bolivar and forcefully required George F. Underhill (U.S. citizen) to remain and keep the waterworks (which he had built) functioning.

Underhill then brought an action for damages caused by the wrongful detention and alleged assaults and affronts.

How did the court gain jurisdiction over General Hernandez?

Would the detention of Underhill be viewed as a violation of his human rights today?

What is the holding of the Court, and why?

What should Underhill do next?

University of Hawaii School of Law Library - Jon Van Dyke Archives Collection

Underhill v. Hernandez (1897)

"Every sovereign State is bound to respect 6'S'fB the independence of every other sovereign State, and the courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of another done within its own territory. Redress of grievances by reason of such acts lTIUSt be obtained through the means open to be availed of by sovereign powers as between themselves." (En1phasis added.)

.4; ',.. ".

Underhill v. Hernandez (1897)

"Every sovereign State is bound to respect 6'S'fB the independence of every other sovereign State, and the courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of another done within its own territory. Redress of grievances by reason of such acts lTIUSt be obtained through the means open to be availed of by sovereign powers as between themselves." (En1phasis added.)

.4; ',.. ".

University of Hawaii School of Law Library - Jon Van Dyke Archives Collection