42 U.S. 290 (_) 1 How. 290 JAMES WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE UNITED STATES, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *291 Bradley, for the plaintiff in error. Legaré, attorney-general, for the United States. *293 Mr. Justice DANIEL delivered the opinion of the court. This cause comes up on a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia. The defendants in error instituted an action of debt in the Circuit Court against the plaintiff in...
42 U.S. 104 (_) 1 How. 104 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM LINN AND OTHERS. Supreme Court of United States. Legaré, the attorney-general, for the United States. Coxe, for the defendants. Mr. Justice THOMPSON delivered the opinion of the court. This case comes up on a writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of Illinois. The writ or summons issued in the cause purports to be in a plea of debt for one hundred thousand dollars. And the...
42 U.S. 250 1 How. 250 11 L. Ed. 120 THE UNITED STATES v. GABRIEL F. IRVING, JAMES E. DEKAY, FRANCIS R. TILLON, AND CHARLES P. CLINCH, SURVIVING EXECUTORS OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF HENRY ECKFORD, DECEASED. January Term, 1843 1 THIS case came up from the Circuit Court for the southern district of New York, under a certificate of division in opinion between the judges of that court upon the two following points: 2 1. Whether the transcript from the books and proceedings of the Treasury,...
42 U.S. 24 (_) 1 How. 24 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. DOMINGO ACOSTA, APPELLEE. Supreme Court of United States. It was submitted by Mr. Legaré, the attorney-general, without argument, on the usual objections assigned, pro forma, for error. Mr. Justice CATRON delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from the decree of the Superior Court of East Florida, confirming eight thousand acres of land to Domingo Acosta, under the acts of Congress for the adjustment of landclaims in...
42 U.S. 197 1 How. 197 11 L. Ed. 100 THOMAS E. ELLIS, JONATHAN M. HILL, DANIEL ROPER, AND T. B. BETHEA, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THOMAS JONES, ADMINISTRATOR OF MONTRAVILLE D. TAYLOR, DECEASED. January Term, 1843 1 THIS case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama. 2 On the 16th of January, 1837, the plaintiffs in error executed the following bill. 3 $5000 Wilcox C. H., Ala., January , 16, 1837 4 Twelve months after date, we...
42 U.S. 282 (_) 1 How. 282 WILLIAM TAYLOR AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS, v. GEORGE M. SAVAGE, EXECUTOR OF SAMUEL SAVAGE, DECEASED, DEFENDANT. Supreme Court of United States. *283 Crittenden, contra. Sergeant, in reply, and for the petitioner. *284 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. This case is brought before the court by the petition of Vincent M. Benham, administrator de bonis non with the will annexed of Samuel Savage. It appears that a bill was filed by William Taylor and...
42 U.S. 28 (_) 1 How. 28 WALTER SMITH, JOHN CARTER, WILLIAM S. NICHOLLS AND OTHERS, SURVIVORS OF CLEMENT SMITH, DECEASED, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. DENNIS CONDRY. Supreme Court of United States. *31 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. This case arises from a collision in the port of Liverpool, between the barque Tasso, and the ship Francis Depau, in which the latter sustained considerable injury. The vessels were both American; the Francis Depau being owned by the...
42 U.S. 265 (_) 1 How. 265 WILLIAM NELSON, A PETITIONER IN BANKRUPTCY, v. DANIEL CARLAND, AN OPPOSING CREDITOR. Supreme Court of United States. Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. In the case of William Nelson, petitioner in bankruptcy in the Kentucky district, against Daniel Carland, an opposing creditor, several points were adjourned by the District to the Circuit Court. Upon the hearing in the last-mentioned court, the district judge, as well as the justice of the...
42 U.S. 118 (_) 1 How. 118 THOMAS MORRIS, COMPLAINANT AND APPELLANT, v. MARIA NIXON, HENRY J. WILLIAMS AND THOMAS BIDDLE, HENRY J. WILLIAMS AND MARIA NIXON, EXECUTORS OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF HENRY NIXON, DECEASED, AND MARIA NIXON, SOLE DEVISEE OF THE SAID LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF HENRY NIXON, AND MARY HUSBAND, AMELIA M. MORRIS, ROBERT MORRIS, WILLIAM P. MORRIS, CHARLOTTE E. MORRIS, HENRY MORRIS, SARAH MORRIS, CHILDREN AND HEIRS AT LAW OF HENRY MORRIS, DECEASED, AND CORNELIUS...
42 U.S. 287 (_) 1 How. 287 WILLIAM J. MINOR AND CATHERINE HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. SHUBAL TILLOTSON. Supreme Court of United States. Webster, of counsel for the defendant. *288 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana. A motion has been made to dismiss the writ, upon the ground that the record contains no bill of exception, nor statement of facts by the court,...
42 U.S. 37 (_) 1 How. 37 LESSEE OF JOHN MERCER, AND MARY SCOTT MERCER, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM CARY SELDEN, DEFENDANT. Supreme Court of United States. *38 Whipple and Walter Jones, for the plaintiffs. Chapman Johnson, for defendant. *48 The opinion of the court was delivered by Mr. Justice McLEAN. This case is brought before this court, from the Circuit Court of the eastern district of Virginia, by a writ of error. An action of ejectment was commenced by the lessors of the...
42 U.S. 161 (_) 1 How. 161 CHARLES MCKNIGHT, APPELLANT, v. LAWRENCE B. TAYLOR, TRUSTEE, &c. Supreme Court of United States. Semmes and Jones, for the appellant. Lee and Bradley, for the appellee. *163 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from the decree of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia, for the county of Alexandria, sitting in chancery. It appears from the record, that the appellant Charles McKnight, by deed bearing date the 29th day of...
42 U.S. 241 (_) 1 How. 241 BERNARD McKENNA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. CHARLES B. FISK, DEFENDANT. Supreme Court of United States. *245 Brent and Brent, for the plaintiff in error. Bradley and Coxe, for the defendant. *246 Mr. Justice WAYNE delivered the opinion of the court. The declaration in this case contains three counts. It is alleged in the first and third, that the defendant, with force and arms, in the county of Washington, seized, took, detained, and destroyed the goods and chattels...
42 U.S. 202 (_) 1 How. 202 WILLIAM T. McCLURG, JOHN C. PARRY, AND ENOCH J. HIGBY, PARTNERS, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE FIRM OF McCLURG, PARRY, AND HIGBY, ASSIGNEES OF JAMES HARLEY, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. LAWRENCE KINGSLAND, ISAAC LIGHTNER. AND JAMES CUDDY, PARTNERS, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE FIRM OF KINGSLAND, LIGHTNER, AND CUDDY, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *204 Dunlap, on behalf of the plaintiffs in error. Mr. Justice BALDWIN delivered the opinion of the court. This case comes...
42 U.S. 153 (_) 1 How. 153 JOHN LLOYD, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. GEORGE S. HOUGH. Supreme Court of United States. Semmes, for the plaintiff in error. Neale, for the defendant. *154 Mr. Justice DANIEL delivered the opinion of the court. This cause is brought before this court upon a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia. The questions for consideration here, arise upon the following statement. The plaintiff in error instituted in the Circuit Court for...
42 U.S. 219 1 How. 219 11 L. Ed. 108 LESSEE OF SARAH I. JEWELL AND OTHERS, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. BENJAMIN JEWELL AND OTHERS, DEFENDANTS. January Term, 1843 1 THIS case was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit Court for the district of South Carolina. 2 The facts which were not denied were few; nearly all the evidence being of a contradictory character. All this evidence was brought to the notice of this court, in the argument, in consequence of the refusal of the court below to...
42 U.S. 89 1 How. 89 11 L. Ed. 58 JONATHAN STROUT AND OTHERS, LIBELLANTS, &C., APPELLANTS, v. JAMES FOSTER AND OTHERS, CLAIMANTS, AND OWNERS OF THE SHIP LOUISVILLE. January Term, 1843 THIS case originated in the District Court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, was carried, by appeal, to the Circuit Court, and finally brought here. There was much contradictory evidence about some of the facts. Those which were not disputed were these: The Harriet, a ship of about three...
42 U.S. 289 1 How. 289 11 L. Ed. 135 JAMES TODD, APPELLANT, v. OTIS DANIELL, DEFENDANT. January Term, 1843 1 AN agreement in writing between the counsel, as well for the appellant as for the appellee, that the decree of the Circuit Court in this case shall be affirmed with legal damages and costs for the said Daniell, having been filed; it is thereupon considered and decreed by this court, that the decree of the said Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed, with costs and...
42 U.S. 14 1 How. 14 11 L. Ed. 30 * GEORGE W. HAMMOND, ADMINISTRATOR DE BONIS NON OF THOMAS HAMMOND, DECEASED, AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS, v. LORENZO LEWIS, EXECUTOR OF LAWRENCE LEWIS, DECEASED, WHO WAS THE ACTING EXECUTOR OF GEN. GEORGE WASHINGTON, APPELLEE. January Term, 1843 THIS was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia, holden in and for the county of Alexandria. The facts in the case were these. General Washington, by his will, executed in 1799,...
42 U.S. 188 1 How. 188 11 L. Ed. 97 ELIZABETH R. CARTWRIGHT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ALEXANDER T. HOWE, GEORGE F. RICHARDS, AND WILLIAM RICHARDS, DEFENDANTS. January Term, 1843 1 THIS cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia, holden in and for the county of Washington, and it having been stated by Mr. Bradley, of counsel for the defendant in error, that the matters in controversy had been agreed and settled...
