It was held that'a case which could other wise be finally determined by that court may, under the statute, be removed from the circuit court of appeals on certiorari at any time during its pendency there; but where there is merely private interest involved it will not be done where there has been no final judgment ; id., citing to this express point Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. Osborne, 146 U. S. 354, 13 Sop. Ct. 281, 36 L. Ed. 1002, which is sometimes incorrectly referred to as holding that the Supreme Court has no power to remove by certiorari before final judgment. While the supreme court may re quire a case to be certified up at any stage, particularly when the question of jurisdic tion is involved, it should not be done to re view an interlocutory decree "unless it is necessary to prevent extraordinary inconven ience and embarrassment in the conduct of the cause" ; American Const. Co. v. Ry. Co., 148 U. S. 372, 13 Sup. Ct. 158, 37 L. Ed. 486. The writ may issue after the mandate has gone down from the circuit court of appeals ; The Conqueror, 166 U. S. 110, 17 Sup. Ct. 510, 41 L. Ed. 937. It may issue to an infe rior state court when the highest state court has refused jurisdiction ; Western Union Tel egraph Co. v. Hughes, 203 U. S. 505, 27 Sup. Ct. 162, 51 L. Ed. 294.
The decisions upon applications for this writ indicate the construction which it has placed upon the phrase used by it in the first case, "questions of gravity and importance." These words are evidently applied only to -cases of public and not private interest and importance. For example, the writ was is sued to settle the construction of a treaty and immigration laws ; The Three Friends, 166 U. S. 1, 17 Sup. Ct. 495, 41 L. Ed. 897; to review a case of habeas corpus finally de termined by the circuit court of appeals; Lau Ow Bew v. U. S., 144 U. S. 47, 12 Sup. 'Ct. 517, 36 L. Ed. 340; to settle questions of jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court ; Muel ler v. Nugent, 184 U. S. 1, 22 Sup. Ct. 269, 46 L. Ed. 405; Louisville Trust Co. v. Com ingor, 184 U. S. 18, 22 Sup. Ct. 293, 46 L. Ed. 413; to secure a uniform construction of the bankruptcy act ; Holden v. Stratton, 191 U. S. 115, 24 Sup. Ct. 45, 48 L. Ed. 116; or of a tariff act; The Conqueror, 166 U. S. 110, 17 Sup. Ct. 510, 41 L. Ed. 937; to determine whether a judge who made an order was disqualified to sit in the circuit court of ap peals on the' review of it; American Const.
Co. v. Ry. Co., 148 U. S. 372, 13 Sup. Ct. 158, 37 L. Ed. 486; to prevent conflict of decision between federal and state courts within the same territorial jurisdiction ; Forsyth v. Ham mond, 166 U. S. 506, 17 Sup. Ct. 665, 41 L. Ed. 1095; to avoid a possible question of ju risdiction upon a writ of error ; Montana Min. Co. v. Min. Co., 204 U. S. 204, 27 Sup. Ct. 254, 51 L. Ed. 444 ; and when there have been conflicting decisions of different circuit courts of appeals; Expanded Metal Co. v. Bradford, 214 U. S. 366, 29 Sup. Ct. 652, 53 L. Ed. 1034.
On the other hand the writ has been re fused where the court of appeals has revers ed proceedings putting a railroad company in the hands of a receiver ; American Const. Co. v. Ry. Co., 148 U. S. 372, 13 Sup. Ct. 158, 37 L. Ed. 486 ; where questions of the state law of res judiee.ta and of master and serv ant were considered not of sufficient "gravity and general importance"; In re Woods, 143 U. S. 202, 12 Sup. Ct. 417, 36 L. Ed. 125; in a case of where the circuit court of appeals was found to have no jurisdiction, and had rendered no decision except to certify that question; Good Shot v. U. S., 179 U. S. 87, 21 Sup. Ct. 33, 45 L. Ed. 101; or where the issue is a mere technicality and the essential rights of the parties are not involved; Smith v. Vulcan Iron Works, 165 U. S. 518, 17 Sup. Ct. 407, 41 L. Ed. 810.
While under section 6 of the Circuit Court of Appeals Act certiorari can only be issued when a writ of error cannot lie, it will not be issued merely because the writ of error will not lie, but only where the case is one of gravity, or where there is conflict between decisions of state and federal courts or be tween federal courts of different circuits, or something affecting the relations of this na tion with foreign nations or of general in terest to the public ; Fields v. U. S., 205 U. S. 292, 27 Sup. Ct. 543, 51 L. Ed. 807.
A certiorari may be allowed when a case has been improperly brought up on a writ of error and the record filed in the latter may be treated as a proper return; Security Trust Co. v. Dent, 187 U. S. 237, 23 Sup. Ct. 61, 47 L. Ed. 158. When a case is removed to it under the act of 1891, the entire record is before the supreme court, which has power to decide the case; Lutcher & Moore Lum ber Co. v. Knight, 217 U. S. 257, 30 Sup. Ct. 505, 54 L. Ed. 757.
See UNITED STATES COURTS ; BILL OF 0E8r TIORARL