Find court opinions that match your case.

Remanded Personal Injury 1847

Bridges v. Armour

Henry D. Bridges, John K. Mabray, James N. Harper, and Stern Simmonds, late Merchants and Partners in Trade, under the Name, Firm, and Style of Bridges, Mabray, and Company, Plaintiffs in error, v. William Armour, Henry Lake, and Felix Walk

46 U.S. 91 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1847

Alexandria Canal Co. v. Swann

The Alexandria Canal Company, Plaintiff in error, v. Francis Swann, Defendant. Where a case is removed from Alexandria county to Washington county, in the District of Columbia, whatever defenoes might have been made in Aléxandria county, ei

46 U.S. 83 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Estate Planning & Probate 1847

Miller v. Herbert

Henry Miller, Administrator of George Miller, deceased, Plaintiff in error, v. Betsey Herbert and Caroline Herbert, Defendants in error. ' Under a statute of Maryland passed in 1706, a deed of manumission ■ is not good unless recorded withi

46 U.S. 72 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1847

Hildeburn v. Turner

Samuel Hildeburn, Plaintiff, v. Henry Turner, Defendant. When a bill of exchange is made payable at a bank, and the bank .itself is the . holder of (he bill,' it is a sufficient demand if the notary presents it at the bank ■ and demands pay

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

Outcome n/a Civil Rights 1847

Walker v. Taylor

Elizabeth Walker, devisee of Robert Walker, deceased, Plaintiff in error, v. Francis T. Taylor, Willaim Robinson, William E. Sablett, Thomas Cook, and John M. Cresup, Trustees of the town of Columbus, Defendants. Where the plaintiff below c

46 U.S. 64 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Business & Corporate Law 1847

McAfee v. Doremus

Morgan McAfee, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas C. Doremus, James Suydam, Cornelius R. Suydam, and John Nixon. By the laws of Louisiana, a notary is required to record in a book kept for that purpose,.all protests of bills made by him and the

46 U.S. 53 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded 1847

Pepper v. Dunlap

James Pepper, Sarah H. Evans, George McCullough, and Louisa McCullough, Plaintiffs in error, v. Hugh W. Dunlap, Curator, &c., and his wife. Where a perpetual injunction was granted by a subordinate State court, and, upon appeal, the highest

46 U.S. 51 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Intellectual Property 1847

United States v. Boyd

The United States, Plaintiffs in error, v. Gordon D. Boyd and others, Defendants. The act of Cóngréss, passed-on the 24th of April, 1820 (3 Statutes? at Large, 566), which substituted cash payments in lieu of credit sales of the public land

46 U.S. 29 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Estate Planning & Probate 1847

United States v. Lawton

The United States, Appellant, v. Joseph Lawton, Executor of Charles Lawton, Martha Pollard, Hannah Maria Kershaw, Wife of James Kershaw, et al. A Spanish .grant of land id Florida, for six miles square, “at: the place called Dunn’s lake, up

46 U.S. 10 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1847

Dick v. Runnels

N. and J. Dick and Company v. Hardin D. Runnels. By the 30th section of the Judiciary Act of1789 (1 Statutes at Large, 88), depositions may be taken in certain cases, .and notice, thereof must be served on the adverse party or his attorney,

46 U.S. 7 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1847

Sewall v. Chamberlain

Stephen Sewall, Appellant, v. Henry V. Chamberlain. Where the prayer of s bill in equity shows that the demand of the complainant is susceptible of definite computation, and that there can be no recovery over the^ sum of two thousand dollar

46 U.S. 6 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Intellectual Property 1847

Wood v. Underhill

James Wood, Plaintiff in error, v. William A. Underhill and Aschel H. Gerow, Defendants. In order to obtain a patent, the specification must- be in such full, clear, and exact terms as to enable any one skilled in the art to which it appert

46 U.S. 1 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion