Find court opinions that match your case.

Outcome n/a Business & Corporate Law 1812

M'Kim v. Voorhies

M'KIM v. VOORHIES. fresent....All the Judges. A staieCouct dtotuT t¿Tn-' join a judgj?.e“C of„ the U.S, THIS was a case certified from the Circuit Court for the district of Kentucky, in which the opinions of the Judges'were opposed. Ac the

11 U.S. 279 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1812

Blackwell v. Patten

BLACKWELL v. PATTEN and others. a wm ofer„^rarteste tf the Februaami may be standing the intervention.ai the August terrei betu *-eii return*3of 'the writ. JONES, for the Defendants in error, moved this Court to dismiss the writ of error, b

11 U.S. 277 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1812

Lynn v. Columbian Turnpike Co.

WISE & LYNN v. THE COLUMBIAN TURNPIKE COMPANY. Present....Jill the Judges. SP°eiTor to • the echcuit Court for the lambía,°this" Cou.t ha? no jurisdiction, if the sum warded beless than iOO dot-aSgreater°sum mayhave beep eiafme"/ • x nE Col

11 U.S. 276 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1812

Dunlop v. Munroe

DUNLOP v. MUNROE. Present....ML the Judges. When the Issue is taken glee" the°' port-master not competent (ogive in eir'^Tofhls”3' distant.U3 When it is nh^e p past-Waster, for the ÍSfef'Sunts! the '"pleadings must be mude to *he case” to!

11 U.S. 242 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Bankruptcy & Debt 1812

Conway's Executors & Devisees v. Alexander

CONWAY’S EXECUTORS AND DEVISEES v. ALEXANDER. Present...Jill the Judges. rf A a*a"ce thereupon convey'intrust to convey the should fait to * *e.mQ’ "stona cer-1 tamday — and pay’the mo™" ney on the the trustees0* convey the ja”hasnoeqñ¡ly c

11 U.S. 218 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed Intellectual Property 1812

Sheehy v. Mandeville

SHEEHY v. MANDEVILLE. Present....All the Judges. A note payable at 60 days, cannot be . given in evidence to support- a count upon a note, ■which count does not state When the note wa3 payable. The variance, Is fatal. Opon executing a writ

11 U.S. 208 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Business & Corporate Law 1812

Barton v. Petit

BARTON v. PETIT AND BAYARD. Present....Ml the Judges. wnu. 11115 UK-dared jomjiy against two Defendants, as dyfewh™Síín fact ouiv one 'dams6 Paslen" taken on' the not'abate his o«n'1 actioh against the t*ed unless authorized so return of th

11 U.S. 194 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed Estate Planning & Probate 1812

Beatty v. Maryland

BEATTY v. THE STATE OF MARYLAND. IJresent....Ml the Judges. a final account settled by an iidministratoi* pha^s Court", »°t ooñciutahisfevornp-. on the' issue of JJo™staYit Vl!l ERROR to the Circuit Court for the district of Columbia, sitti

11 U.S. 281 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1812

Wallen v. Williams

WALLEN v. WILLIAMS. Present.,..Ml the Judges. This Court anU oíeraüon issued by the enibrceitsde10 cree pending the writ of or-of error be'not a supersedeas t« the decree. ERROR to the Circuit Court of the district of Tcrinessee, to reverse

11 U.S. 278 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed 1812

Morgan v. Reintzel

MORGAN v. REINTZEL. Present....All the Judges. In a suit against the maker of a promissory note, by an indorsor who Has been obliged to take it up, the Plaintiff must produce the . note upon the trial. The payment of the mouey by the indors

11 U.S. 273 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed Personal Injury 1812

Marsteller v. M'Clean

MARSTELLER AND OTHERS v. M‘CLEAN. Present,...all the judges. f.a order to avoid the plea of the statute of limitations to au action by joint tenants, it is necessary tó show ■ that all the Plaintiffs were under a disability to sue. ERROR to

11 U.S. 156 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed 1812

Wood v. Davis

HEZEKIAH WOOD v. JOHN DAVIS and others. Present....Ml the Judges. A verdict apt! judgment the mother ' was born tree is not conclusive evidence-of the freedom of her children — unless between the same parties or privies. ERROR to the Circui

11 U.S. 271 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed 1812

Riddle v. Moss

RIDDLE v. MOSS. Present....Ml the Judges. The principal Obligor in a bond is not a witness for the -surety, in an Shond;°the principal beSesnret/for costs in case •*oiíddbeent isaiDst him. ERROR to the Circuit Court for the district of Colu

11 U.S. 206 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Bankruptcy & Debt 1812

Wilson v. Koontz

WILSON v. KOONTZ. Fresent,...Ml the Judges. The DefentAciimenT U chancery in "Virginia may tuteof limta-. tions without answer A Defendantwho removes fromonecoun- ¡„ vhg1nt!,h of Koontz and Ober, as principal debtor, and Thomas Irvine and J

11 U.S. 202 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1812

Welch v. Lindo

WELCH v. LINDO. Present....Ml the Judges. The mere profession of 9 promisory note by an indorsee, who liad indorsed it to another, js not sufficient evidence of his right of action, against his indorser, without a re-assignment or receipt f

11 U.S. 159 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Intellectual Property 1812

Hughes v. Moore

HUGHES v. MOORE. . Present....Ml the judges.■ 'A Plaintiffmay before verdict, discount in lús and wave* the Issues joined thereon, money as a ®°: üff for the*" “lim7 d°n? mi^maíiSofthe Defendant p“ own,name {“'¿“i wldcl1 ¡¡^patented the «am

11 U.S. 176 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed Bankruptcy & Debt 1812

Welch v. Mandeville

WELCH v. MANDEVILLE. Present....Ml the judges. The refusal of the Court Below to re-m-state a cause which' has dismissal, is no ground for Thenomin™' Plaintiff may dismiss a suit name by "a creditor who the cause of rciion. ERROR to the Cir

11 U.S. 152 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1812

United States v. Brig Eliza

THE UNITED STATES v. THE BRIG ELIZA. Fresent....all thejudges, A vessel . p^eeded toa foreign port, bet, ofjamkjy 1808> Seized upon & return, *hat penalty of she should not be seized THIS was an appeal from the sentence of the Circuit ;Cour

11 U.S. 113 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1812

Russell v. Clark's Executors

NATHANIEL RUSSELL v. JOHN I. CLARK'S EXECUTORS, and others. Msent.... Washington, justice. The construction of a letter of credit, or of guaranty, must be-the same ih a Court of equity, as in a Court of law; and any facts which might be int

11 U.S. 69 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed Bankruptcy & Debt 1812

King v. Riddle

KING v. RIDDLE. J?resent....Jfll the-Judges*' deeln'fe1 ¿üod evidence to of^the'statute of limitations, A discharge SESttw’S the District of no'lrar'to ah ¿choir. . ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, sitting at Alexand

11 U.S. 168 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Business & Corporate Law 1812

Davy's Executors v. Faw

DAVY’S EXECUTORS v. FAW. An award will not be set aside in equity on aepount of an omission by the arbitrators to aet uppn part - of the matters submitted, unless that omission ihaii have jtired the com the andBtiot -the* Question of U-tie,

11 U.S. 171 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Tax Law 1812

New Jersey v. Wilson

THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. WILSON. A leeiflative m> declaring fitat certain shouidWbe°purchased for the not*thereat**1 ter,’ be subject C0. any tax,• constituted a contract, which could “dbyeSt aáentlegislative act. Such repealing act being

11 U.S. 164 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1812

Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon

THE SCHOONER EXCHANGE v. M'FADDON & OTHERS. Present ...dllljke judges. ¿tPoUfbwm-Tofa foreign sovewit^he Uni? ted States, «¡ming: imo demeaning8" herself in a. ^.^ye ™"pt from the jurfeoftl*e THIS being a cause in which the sovereign right

11 U.S. 116 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Employment Law 1812

Sloop Active v. United States

THE SLOOP ACTIVE v. THE UNITED STATES. 'Present*... JJll the judges. Thedepatture from Vtheel wharf of á port, and pro» andean hait'tC? therefrom not a deparport ^within110 the meaning of tfie ’3d ‘ section of the supplementary embargo act

11 U.S. 100 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion