Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Sweeney v. United States

• 1883 • 109 U.S. 618 • Waite Court
Sweeney v. United States was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1883. The case involved a dispute between the United States and John Sweeney, a former employee of the United States Treasury Department. Sweeney had been dismissed from his position for alleged misconduct and was seeking back pay for the time he had worked. The Supreme Court held that the United States was not liable for back pay to Sweeney. The Court reasoned that the United States had the right to dismiss an...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1883
Docket: 109
109 U.S. 618
3 S. Ct. 344
27 L. Ed. 1053
1883 U.S. LEXIS 1001

Sweeney v. United States

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Sweeney v. United States was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1883. The case involved a dispute between the United States and John Sweeney, a former employee of the United States Treasury Department. Sweeney had been dismissed from his position for alleged misconduct and was seeking back pay for the time he had worked. The Supreme Court held that the United States was not liable for back pay to Sweeney. The Court reasoned that the United States had the right to dismiss an employee for misconduct without being liable for back pay. The Court also held that the United States was not liable for back pay because the misconduct of which Sweeney was accused was not proven. The Court's decision in Sweeney v. United States established that the United States is not liable for back pay to employees who are dismissed for misconduct. The decision also established that the United States is not liable for back pay if the misconduct of which the employee is accused is not proven.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in this case, arguing that the trial court had erred in its instructions to the jury. He argued that a conviction should not have been sustained on circumstantial evidence alone; rather, there must be some direct proof of guilt. In his view, it was insufficient for the prosecution to prove only that Sweeney had access to and knowledge of certain documents related to an alleged conspiracy without any other corroborating evidence linking him directly with criminal activity. Justice Field further noted that even if such circumstantial evidence were sufficient for a conviction, then at least one witness should have been called who could testify as having seen Sweeney commit or participate in acts which constituted part of the crime charged against him. As no such witness was presented by either side during trial proceedings, Justice Field concluded that there was not enough reliable proof available upon which a guilty verdict could be based and thus he dissented from the majority’s decision affirming Sweeney's conviction.

Opinion written by Justice MRWaite
Decided: Dec 17, 1883
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms