28 U.S. 269 (_) 3 Pet. 269 JAMES D. WOLF vs. GEORGE F. USHER. Supreme Court of United States. Mr Coxe, for plaintiff; Mr Whipple, for defendant. When the case was opened by the counsel for the plaintiff, it was found on inspecting the record, that the particular point on which the judges of the circuit court had differed, was not certified. The whole record had been sent up, and it contained a certificate that the judges of the court had differed in opinion, without a specific statement of what...
28 U.S. 43 (_) 3 Pet. 43 THOMAS WILLISON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR vs. ANDERSON WATKINS, DEFENDANT IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *45 The case was argued by Mr Blanding and Mr M'Duffie for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr Berrien, attorney general, for the defendant. Mr Justice BALDWIN delivered the opinion of the Court. This was an action of trespass to try titles, brought in 1822, in the circuit court of the United States for the district of South Carolina, by Watkins against Willison,...
29 U.S. 332 4 Pet. 332 7 L. Ed. 876 WILLIAM T. GALT AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS v. JAMES GALLOWAY, JUN. AND OTHERS, APPELLEES. January Term, 1830 APPEAL from the circuit court of Ohio. James Galt, as heir to his brother Patrick Galt, the ancestor of the complainants, on the 6th day of August 1787, made an entry for military lands in the Virginia reservation, in the following words: 'No. 610, James Galt (heir) enters one thousand acres on part of a military warrant, No. 194, on the Miami river,...
29 U.S. 172 (_) 4 Pet. 172 JOHN V. WILCOX AND THOMAS WILCOX vs. THE EXECUTORS OF KEMP PLUMMER. Supreme Court of United States. *174 Mr Wirt, for the plaintiff. Mr. Webster for the defendant. *180 Mr. Justice JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court. This suit was instituted in the circuit court of the United States, in North Carolina, to recover of the defendants the amount of a loss sustained by reason of the neglect or unskilful conduct of their testator, while acting in the character of an...
28 U.S. 57 (_) 3 Pet. 57 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS vs. ISAAC T. PRESTON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF LOUISIANA, APPELLEE. Supreme Court of United States. *60 The case was argued by Mr Berrien, attorney general and Mr Livingston for the United States; and by Mr Jones for the appellee. *64 Mr Justice JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court. The case of the Josefa Segunda has been twice already before this court: the first time upon the question of condemnation; the second, upon the application of...
29 U.S. 124 (_) 4 Pet. 124 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS vs. JOHN MORRISON AND OTHERS, APPELLEES. Supreme Court of United States. *126 For the United States, Mr Berrien, attorney general contended. Mr Barbour, for the appellees. *135 Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court. The single question in this case is, whether the United States, or certain other creditors of the defendant, John Morrison, have the prior lien on lands of the said Morrison which have been conveyed to...
28 U.S. 12 (_) 3 Pet. 12 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR vs. THOMAS BUFORD, DEFENDANT IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *20 The case was argued by Mr Berrien, attorney general of the United States, for the plaintiffs in error; and by Mr Wickliffe and Mr Ogden for the defendant. *25 Mr Justice M'LEAN delivered the opinion of the Court: This suit was brought by writ of error from the circuit court of Kentucky, to reverse a judgment obtained in that court against a claim prosecuted...
28 U.S. 36 (_) 3 Pet. 36 ANNA MARIA THORNTON, EXECUTRIX OF WILLIAM THORNTON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR vs. THE BANK OF WASHINGTON. Supreme Court of United States. *37 Mr C.C. Lee and Mr Jones, for the plaintiffs in error. Mr Lear and Mr Webster, for the defendant in error. *40 Mr Justice STORY, after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the Court: This case comes before us on a demurrer to the evidence in the court below, taken by the original defendant, now plaintiff in error; and this in our...
29 U.S. 480 (_) 4 Pet. 480 THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL IN FOREIGN PARTS PLAINTIFFS vs. THE TOWN OF PAWLET AND OZIAS CLARKE. Supreme Court of United States. *484 The case was argued by Mr Webster, for the plaintiffs; and by Mr Doddridge, for the defendants. Mr Doddridge also presented the written argument of Mr J.C. Wright, for the defendants; as did Mr. Webster, an argument for the *485 plaintiffs, prepared by the counsel in the circuit court of Vermont. *500 Mr Justice STORY...
28 U.S. 68 3 Pet. 68 7 L. Ed. 605 THE BANK OF THE UNITED STATES AND SAMUEL W. VENABLES'S EXECUTORS v. JOHN T. SWAN. January Term, 1830 1 ON consideration of the motion made by Mr Wirt, of counsel for the appellee, for leave to take from the office of the clerk of this court, before the adjournment of the present term of this court, an official certificate of the dismissal of this appeal, dismissed last Saturday, being the 30th of January, of the present term of this court: 2 It is ordered that...
28 U.S. 320 (_) 3 Pet. 320 DANIEL STRINGER, PHILIP M. LINGER, NICHOLAS, MARGARET AND JOSEPH LINGER, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR vs. THE LESSEE OF JOHN YOUNG, ARCHIBALD M'CALL, MARY CADWALLADER, WILLIAM REED AND ANNE HIS WIFE, AND HARRIET M'CALL. Supreme Court of United States. *323 The case was argued by Mr Smyth, for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr Doddridge, for the defendants. *336 Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court. This was an ejectment brought in the court of the...
28 U.S. 461 (_) 3 Pet. 461 THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, COMPLAINANTS vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *464 Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL said, that this was not like the case of several defendants, where a service on one might be good, though not on another. Here the service prescribed by the rule was to be upon the governor and upon the attorney general. A service on one was not sufficient to entitle the court to proceed against the state. Mr Wirt...
29 U.S. 393 (_) 4 Pet. 393 SARAH SPRATT, ADMINISTRATRIX OF JAMES SPRATT, APPELLANT, vs. THOMAS SPRATT, APPELLEE. Supreme Court of United States. *399 Mr Key and Mr Jones, for the appellant, argued. Mr Coxe, for the defendant. *403 Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the court. This case depends entirely on the title of the defendant in error to the premises in the avowry mentioned, who is one of the brothers and heirs of James Spratt deceased. James Spratt was a native of Ireland,...
29 U.S. 511 (_) 4 Pet. 511 JULIE SOULARD, WIDOW, AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS vs. THE UNITED STATES. JOHN T. SMITH, APPELLANT vs. THE UNITED STATES. Supreme Court of United States. The cases were argued by Mr Benton, for the appellants, and by Mr Wirt, for the United States. Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL stated, The court have held the two cases of Soulard and John T. Smith against the United States under advisement. After bestowing upon them the most deliberate attention, we are unable to form a...
28 U.S. 242 (_) 3 Pet. 242 ANN SHANKS, MARGARETTA SHANKS, SARAH P. SHANKS, GRACE F. SHANKS, AND ELIZA SHANKS, (APPELLANTS BELOW) PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR vs. ABRAHAM DUPONT AND JANE HIS WIFE, DANIEL PEPPER AND ANN PEPPER, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *243 The case was argued at January term 1829, by Mr Cruger and Mr Writ for the plaintiffs in error; and by Mr Legaré for the defendants. Mr Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the Court. This was a writ of error to the...
29 U.S. 392 (_) 4 Pet. 392 OLIVER SAUNDERS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR vs. BENJAMIN GOULD. Supreme Court of United States. It was submitted, without argument, by Mr Coxe for the plaintiff in error, and Mr Whipple for the defendant. Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL stated, When this case was brought before the court, it was admitted by the counsel to be essentially the same with Gardner vs. Collins, reported in 2 Peters's Rep. 58; but he relied on certain evidences which he exhibited of a settled judicial...
29 U.S. 349 (_) 4 Pet. 349 MARY RONKENDORFF, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR vs. JAMES N. TAYLOR'S LESSEE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR Supreme Court of United States. *355 The case was argued by Mr Jones for the plaintiff in error; and by Mr Barrell and Mr Key for the defendant. *356 Mr Jones, for the plaintiff in error, contended. Mr Barrell and Mr Key, for the defendant. *358 Mr. Justice M'LEAN delivered the opinion of the Court. This writ of error is prosecuted to reverse a judgment of the circuit court for the...
29 U.S. 514 (_) 4 Pet. 514 THE PROVIDENCE BANK, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR vs. ALPHEUS BILLINGS AND THOMAS G. PITTMAN. Supreme Court of United States. *517 The case was argued by Mr Whipple, for the plaintiffs in error; and by Mr Hazzard and Mr Jones, for the defendants. Mr Hazzard, for the defendants. *559 Mr Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court. This is a writ of error to a judgment rendered in the highest court for the state of Rhode Island, in an action of trespass brought by...
28 U.S. 222 (_) 3 Pet. 222 THE PATAPSCO INSURANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR vs. JOHN COULTER, DEFENDANT IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *225 Mr Mayer, for the plaintiffs in error, contended. Mr Wirt, for the defendant in error. *228 Mr Justice JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court: This was a case of insurance on profits on a voyage from Philadelphia to Gibraltar, and a port in the Mediterranean not higher up than Marseilles, and at and from thence to Sonsonate, in the...
28 U.S. 433 (_) 3 Pet. 433 WILLIAM PARSONS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR vs. BEDFORD, BREEDLOVE, AND ROBESON, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *436 The case was argued by Mr Livingston and Mr Webster for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr Jones for the defendants. Mr Livingston and Mr Webster, for the plaintiff in error. *441 Mr Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the Court. This is a writ of error to the district court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana. The facts...
