Find court opinions that match your case.

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1809

Pierce v. Turner

PIERCE v. TURNER. The aet of as-' flembly

9 U.S. 154 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1809

Violett v. Patton

VIOLETT v. PATTON. i'o constitute a considerationsai-y that a benerneSl>toUld the promisor. It is sufficient raffiahie eflows from the pro-that Sthe promise is the iiiducement to ¶ Miiiii aaction • a blank endorsemeut up-piece of paper -wit

9 U.S. 142 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Employment Law 1809

United States v. Peters

THE UNITED STATES v. JUDGE PETERS. The legislature 'f a the judgments, „f the omi-is ot’tlK- Hnaed N-j’ite com-t of appeals in erected by ü¡e hre! vise and cm-, of The* state eoui-ts of admiralty, claims of » state m.ay. be ¿'Ted Ty' the de

9 U.S. 115 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Business & Corporate Law 1809

Hodgson v. Marine Insurance

HODGSON v. THE MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY OF ALEXANDRIA. A general poevery "person having an intething insured! and containing that the ' p'w' perty is nen tral, covers belligerent a« ■well as neutral property-covenant on. a policy, it is no

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

Affirmed Intellectual Property 1809

Matthews v. Zane's Lessee

MATTHEWS v. ZANE’S LESSEE The lands in. eluded within the 'Zañeville district by the yet of the 3d Jvlarch, 1803, fcoulrf not, after that date, be sold at the Marietta landofHcc. ÉRROR to the supreme court of the state of Ohio for the count

9 U.S. 92 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Intellectual Property 1809

Bank of the United States v. Deveaux

THE BANK OF THE UNITED STATES v. DEVEAUX ET AL. A corporation aggregate, compi.M'd or eiuzuis of one state, may sue a citizen of another state in the circuit court of th¿ United States. Where the ¡urisdictio.nnf the United °Staies ttepends,

9 U.S. 61 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Employment Law 1809

Hope Insurance v. Boardman

THE HOPE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PROVIDENCE v. BOARDMAN ET AL. A corpomioti —and ' cannot litigate in the United SlateB, unless in consequence of the character of the individuals frho compose the body politic, -which, character must appear b)

9 U.S. 57 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Business & Corporate Law 1809

Yeaton v. Bank of Alexandria

YEATON v. THE BANK OF ALEXANDRIA. . The. hank mayA™™"fa7* an action, anf eT mis.,„ry note' mude negotiabank,'without ^£e™!0nt;‘i v;¿g 'itfsoívent, although „ent ““¡¡01^ the accommoof notwithstarui'(“’i plica ‘contract of theemloi sor ot a p

9 U.S. 49 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a 1809

Young v. Bank of Alexandria

YOUNG v. THE BANK OF ALEXANDRIA. Alexandria upi promissory "enable*8 in that bank, are' entitled to trial at the return term of the wrlt> ERROR to the circuit court of the district of Coumbia, sitting ip Alexandria, in ári action of debt up

9 U.S. 45 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Bankruptcy & Debt 1809

Tucker v. Oxley

JOHN AND JAMES TUCKER v. OXLEY, ASSIGNEE OF T. MOORE, A BANKRUPT. Under the of-'the ^United States a joint debt jnay be set off against the separate claim of the asners. Butsucb made^at lav” ia',v. a joint debt ™JerCal> sépaí rate oumum^"bi

9 U.S. 34 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Estate Planning & Probate 1809

M'Keen v. Delancy's Lessee

M‘KEEN v. DELANCY’S LESSEE. TJiuTer the act ot Ucmisvlvania of ins, v/luoh requires acknowledged0 before a jvset\}{c cooniy where the loen thé’imv' established practice before toaeknowledge ■as7¡cc'Jof0t¡.° ° supreme court of theprovince »L

9 U.S. 22 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed 1809

Fairfax's Executor v. Fairfax

FAIRFAX’S EXECUTOR v. ANN FAIRFAX. Upon theissiu of plane adminintravit the jury must find specially the ■ amount of assets in the hands of the executor, otherwise the court cannot render judgment upon the verdict. • if the defendant below

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

Affirmed 1809

Mandeville & Jamesson v. Wilson

MANDEVILLE AND JAMESSON v. WILSON. Amendments are within the-, discretion of the court below. Quare, whether the court ought to permit araehdments after judgment upon demurrer. In the statute of limitations, the exception in favour of merch

9 U.S. 15 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed 1809

Cooke v. Woodrow

COOKE AND OTHERS v. WOODROW. in an action of judgment* bm low be in favour of the originnl defendant, the value !>f 1.1'° '"alter on the writ of error’1,1 the ¡^th^UnUed States, is the SmagesTn the declaration, to obtain the ui^sEribin* wit

9 U.S. 13 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed 1809

Henderson v. Moore

HENDERSON v. MOORE The refusal c. the court he* low to punt a new trial is not up"n the plea of payment to ^^"upon bond condlto W ¡(le„ce may°he ’received of the with an Ac^"he^ntlff that it was in “’n °£ a“nje" fróm such evicontradicted"’

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

Outcome n/a 1809

United States v. Weeks

THE UNITED STATES v. WEEKS. A writ of error r“ctly from the supreme court court of the dis^^th^tai’ ter has a» the original juriscult-court? °

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

Reversed Personal Injury 1808

Grant v. Naylor

Grant v. Naylor. Letter of credit. — Execution of commission. A letter of credit addressed, by mistake, to John and Joseph, and delivered to John and Jeremiah, will not support an action by John and Jeremiah for goods furnished by them to t

8 U.S. 224 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Personal Injury 1808

Pollard v. Dwight

*Pollard and Pickett v. Dwight et al. Foreign attachment. — Qi/rcuit cowrt. — Covenant of seisin. — Lcrnd lam of Virginia. — Pa/rol evidence. The appearance of the defendants to a foreign attachment, in a circuit court of the United States,

8 U.S. 421 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Bankruptcy & Debt 1808

Higginson v. Mein

*Higginson v. Mein. Confiscation. The act of Georgia confiscating the estate of a mortgagor, is no bar to the claim of the'mortgagee, a British merchant, whose debt was only sequestered during the war. The estate of the mortgagor only was c

8 U.S. 415 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed Tax Law 1808

Stead's executors v. Course

Stead’s executors v. Course. Tax-sale. A collector, selling land for taxes, must act in conformity with the law from which his power is derived; and the purchaser is bound to inquire, whether he has so acted. It is incumbent on the vendee,

8 U.S. 403 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Affirmed Estate Planning & Probate 1808

Ramsay v. Lee

*Ramsay v. Lee. Title to slaves. In Virginia, in 1784, no gift of a slave was valid, unless in writing and recorded, although possession accompanied the gift. Qucm-e ? Whether five years’ possession is alone a good title, to enable a plaint

8 U.S. 401 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Reversed 1808

Spires v. Willison

Spires v. Willison. Slavery. By the act of assembly of Virginia of 17B8, no gift of a slave was valid, unless in writing and recorded; but parol evidence may be given of the existence of a deed of gift, to show the nature of the possession

8 U.S. 398 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Tax Law 1808

Young v. Bank of Alexandria

* Young v. Bank of Alexandria. District of Columbia. An appeal or writ of error lies from the judgments of the circuit court of the District of Columbia, to this court, in cases where the Bank of Alexandria is plaintiff, and the judgments b

8 U.S. 384 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion

Outcome n/a Personal Injury 1808

Peisch v. Ware

*Peisch and others v. Ware and others. United States v. Cargo of the Ship Favourite. Salvage. — Mistalee.—Forfeiture. Wine and spirits saved from a wreck and landed, are not liable to forfeiture, because unaccompanied with such marks and ce

8 U.S. 347 Supreme Court of the United States Read opinion