Find court opinions that match your case.

Remanded Civil Rights 1854

Shields v. Barlow

William B. Shields and others, Appellants, v. Robert R. Barlow. A vendor sold an estate in Louisiana fora large sum of money, and received payment, from'time to time, for nearly one half of the amount. Afterwards, he agreed to take back the

58 U.S. 130 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Civil Rights 1854

Stewart v. United States

Adam D. Stewart, Plaintiff in error, v. The United States. Congress have directed by law that in certain cases thp duties of collectors of the revenue -should- be united with those of naval officer or surveyor of the port, but never with th

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

Remanded Personal Injury 1854

Lawrence v. Minturn

Alexander M. Lawrence and Others, Claimants of the Ship Hornet, Appellants, v. Charles Minturn. A consignee of goods has a right, in his own name, to libel a vessel for their nondelivery, unless there is something to show that he had no int

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

Remanded 1854

United States v. One Case of Clocks

The United States, Plaintiffs in error, v. One Case of Clocks, Lion, Pinsard, and Co., Claimants. The decision in the three preceding cases again affirmed. This case was brought up, by writ of error, from the circuit court of the United Sta

58 U.S. 99 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded 1854

United States v. One Package of Merchandise

The United States, Plaintiffs in error, v. One Package of Merchandise. Lion, Pinsard, and Co., Claimants. The decision in the two preceding eases again affirmed. This case was brought up, by writ of error, from the circuit court of the Unit

58 U.S. 98 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded 1854

United States v. Nine Cases of Silk Hats

The United States, Plaintiffs in error, v. Nine Cases of Silk Hats. Paul Tricon, Claimant. The decision iitthe preceding case again affirmed. This ease was brought up, by writ of error, from the circuit court of the United States for the ea

58 U.S. 97 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded 1854

United States v. Sixty-seven Packages of Dry Goods

The United States, Plaintiffs in error, v. Sixty-seven Packages of Dry Goods. Jules Levois, Claimant. The 66th section of the act of 1799, (1 Stat. at Large, t>77, ch'. 22,) which declares that “.if any goods, wares, or merchandise, of whic

58 U.S. 85 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Intellectual Property 1854

Battin v. Taggert

Joseph Battin, Patentee, and Samuel Battin, Assignee, Plaintiffs in error, v. James Taggert, Defendant in error. Joseph Battin, Patentee, and Samuel Battin, Assignee, Plaintiffs in error, v. Robert Radcliffe and John Johnson, Defendants in

58 U.S. 74 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Intellectual Property 1854

Troy Iron & Nail Factory v. Odiorne

The Troy Iron and Nail Factory, Appellant, v. George Odiorne, Jr., and Francis Odiorne. Amachine for making hook-headed spikes was constructed in Boston, prior to the 18th of April, 1839, and therefore not within a patent for a machine for

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

Remanded Business & Corporate Law 1854

Raymond v. Tyson

Israel W. Raymond, Owner and Claimant of the Cargo of the Ship Orphan, consisting of 844 tons of coal, Appellant, v William Tyson, Libellant. A charter-party is an informal instrument, often having inaccurate clauses, which ought to have a

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

Remanded 1854

Wickliffe v. Owings

Robert Wickliffe, Appellant, v. Thomas D. Owings. Where a bill in chancery avers • that the defendant is a citizen of another State, this averment can only be impugned in a special plea to .the jurisdiction of the court. The answer is not t

58 U.S. 47 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Estate Planning & Probate 1854

Barribeau v. Brant

Pierre Barribeau and Euphrasie T. Perry, Appellants, v. Joshua B. Brant. Where the death of a party complainant was suggested at December term, 1851, of this court, and his legal representatives did not appear by the tenth day of this term,

58 U.S. 43 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Employment Law 1854

United States v. Coxe

The United States, Appellants, v. Daniel W. Coxe and others. The principles affirmed in the cases of the United States v. King and others, 7 How. 833, and of the United States v. Turner’s Heirs, 11 How. 663, again established. This was an a

58 U.S. 41 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1854

York & Maryland Line Railroad v. Winans

The York and Maryland Line Railroad Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Ross Winans. A railroad company, organized under a charter from Pennsylvania, is responsible for the infraction of a patent right respecting cars, although the entire capit

58 U.S. 30 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Intellectual Property 1854

Haydel v. Dufresne

Marcelin Haydel, Plaintiff in error, v. Francois Dufresne. In 1811, congress passed an act (2 Stat. at L. 663) giving to the owners of land in Louisiana bordering on any river, creek, &e., the preference in purchasing back land ; and whore,

58 U.S. 23 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1854

Olney v. The Steam-ship Falcon

James N. Olney, Libellant and Appellant, v. The Steam-ship Falcon, her tackle, &c., and George Law and Marshall O. Roberts, Claimants. Where it was alleged in a libel, that the libellant was “entitled to recover from the vessel the damages

58 U.S. 19 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Dismissed 1854

Udall v. The Steam-ship Ohio

James Udall, Libellant and Appellant, v. The Steam-ship Ohio, her tackle, &c., Marshall O. Roberts and others, Claimants. Where a libel was dismissed by the district court, which decree was affirmed by the circuit court, and it appeared tha

58 U.S. 17 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Remanded Business & Corporate Law 1854

Arthurs v. Hart

John Arthurs, John Nicholson, Jonas R. McClintock, and William Stewart, carrying on business under the firm and name of Arthurs, Nicholson, and Co., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Jesse Hart. Where a jury is waived, and questions of law and fact d

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

Outcome n/a Estate Planning & Probate 1854

Shields v. Thomas

John G. Shields, Appellant, v. Isaac Thomas and others. Where a bill was filed by several distributees of an estate, to compel the payment of money alleged to be due to them, and a decree was rendered in their favor, this court ‘ has jurisd

58 U.S. 3 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Tax Law 1854

Widow & Heirs of de la Lande v. Treasurer of the State

The Widow and Heirs of Benjamin Poydras de la Lande, Plaintiffs in Error, v. The Treasurer of the State of Louisiana. Where a proceeding was instituted in Louisiana, in the name of the treasurer of the State, to recover a tax imposed upon p

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