59 U.S. 479 (1855) 18 How. 479 STEPHEN V.R. ABLEMAN, PLFF. IN ER., v. SHERMAN M. BOOTH. No. 35. Supreme Court of United States. Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. Upon looking into the transcript in this case, we find that the questions of constitutional law which it involves arose in a preliminary proceeding in the case between the same parties, of which we have just spoken. In that case, the whole subject was disposed of in the state court, and the principal question...
59 U.S. 50 (1855) 18 How. 50 JOEL WRIGHT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. SCHUYLER H. MATTISON. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Mr. Browning, for the plaintiff in error, and Mr. Williams, for the defendant in error. *52 Mr. Justice DANIEL delivered the opinion of the court. The questions determined by the circuit court, whose decision we are called on to review, arose upon the construction of two statutes of the State of Illinois, which limit the right of action against the possessors...
59 U.S. 467 (1855) 18 How. 467 RICHARD D. WOOD, JOHN YARROW, JAMES ABBOTT, AND JOSEPH BACON, COPARTNERS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF WOOD, ABBOTT, AND COMPANY, APPELLANTS, v. ALEXANDER C. DAVIS. Supreme Court of United States. *468 It was argued by Mr. St. George T. Campbell and Mr. Browning, for the appellants, and Mr. Carlisle, for the defendant. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of the United States for the northern...
59 U.S. 16 18 How. 16 15 L. Ed. 277 WILLIAM J. MCLEAN AND JOHN M. BASS, EXECUTORS OF HENRY R. W. HILL, DECEASED, THE SAID HENRY R. W. HILL AND WILLIAM J. MCLEAN BEING THE SURVIVING PARTNERS OF THE FIRM OF N. AND J. DICK AND CO., APPELLANTS, v. JAMES L. MEEK, ADMINISTRATOR OF JOSEPH MEEK, AND JAMES L. MEEK AND JOSEPH MEEK. December Term, 1855 THIS was an appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of Mississippi. The case was this. Joseph Meek, a citizen and...
59 U.S. 286 18 How. 286 15 L. Ed. 378 WILLIAM D. NUTT, EXECUTOR OF ALEXANDER HUNTER, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. PHILIP H. MINOR. December Term, 1855 THIS case was brought up by writ of error from the circuit court of the United States for the District of Columbia, holden in and for the county of Washington. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. It was argued by Mr. Davis and Mr. Bradley , for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Badger and Mr. Lawrence , for the defendant. Mr....
59 U.S. 517 (1855) 18 How. 517 MATTHEW WATSON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. COLIN S. TARPLEY. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Mr. Badger, for the plaintiff in error, no counsel appearing for the defendant. Mr. Justice DANIEL delivered the opinion of the court. On the 29th April, 1850, the plaintiff in error, a citizen of Tennessee, brought this action of assumpsit against the defendant, a citizen of Mississippi, in the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of...
59 U.S. 267 (1855) 18 How. 267 SAMUEL WARD, CLAIMANT OF THE BARK MOPANG, APPELLANT, v. WILLIAM M. PECK, JACOB BADGER, FREEMAN KINGSLEY, AND HUMPHREY DEVEREUX, LIBELLANTS. [*] Supreme Court of United States. It was submitted on the record by Mr. Benjamin, for the appellant, and argued by Mr. Stanton, for the appellees. Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. The pleadings in this case present but the single question of the title or ownership of the Bark Mopang. Originally, the...
59 U.S. 556 (1855) 18 How. 556 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. JUAN MANUEL VACA AND JUAN FELIPE PENA. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Mr. Cushing, (attorney-general,) for the United States, and by Mr. Jones, with whom was Mr. Strode, for the appellees. Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. On the 27th January, 1843, the claimants and appellees in this case, Juan Manuel Vaca and José Phelipe Peña, (the latter under the name of Armijo,) received a grant of land...
59 U.S. 1 (1855) 18 How. 1 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. PEARSON B. READING. Supreme Court of United States. *2 The case was argued by Mr. Cushing, (attorney-general,) for the United States, and by Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Bibb, for the appellee. There was also a brief filed upon the side of the appellee, by Mr. Volney E. Howard. *3 Mr. Justice WAYNE delivered the opinion of the court. We find in the record of this appeal, that Reading, the appellee, was an immigrant from the United States, in...
59 U.S. 241 (1855) 18 How. 241 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE MINNESOTA AND NORTHWESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY. Supreme Court of United States. The motion was argued by Mr. Cushing, and opposed by Mr. Barbour and Mr. Johnson. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error to the supreme court of the Territory of Minnesota. An action of trespass was brought by the United States against the defendants before the district court of the first district, in...
60 U.S. 73 (_) 19 How. 73 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. CHARLES LE BARON. Supreme Court of United States. *75 The case was argued by Mr. Cushing (Attorney General) for the United States, and by Mr. Stewart for the appellee. Mr. Justice CURTIS delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama, in an action of debt, founded on an official bond of Oliver S. Beers, as deputy postmaster at Mobile,...
59 U.S. 557 (1855) 18 How. 557 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. THOMAS O. LARKIN AND JOHN S. MISSROON. Supreme Court of United States. *558 It was argued by Mr. Cushing, (attorney-general,) for the United States, and by Mr. Lawrence, with whom was Mr. Goold, for the appellees. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from a decree of the district court of the United States for the northern district of California, in which a land claim was confirmed to the...
59 U.S. 92 (1855) 18 How. 92 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. CATESBY AP. ROGER JONES. Supreme Court of United States. *93 It was argued by Mr. Cushing, (attorney-general,) for the United States, and by Mr. Carlisle, and Mr. Jones, for the defendant. *94 Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. The action in this case is for money had and received by the defendant, Jones. It was entered amicably, and submitted on a case stated. The defendant is a lieutenant in the navy of...
59 U.S. 30 (1855) 18 How. 30 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. JOHN C. FREMONT. Supreme Court of United States. *36 Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from the northern district of California. A final decree was entered in this case at the last term, and a mandate was issued to the district court, directing such further proceedings in conformity to the opinion and decree of this court, as according to right and justice, and the laws of the United States,...
59 U.S. 100 (1855) 18 How. 100 THE UNITED STATES, USE OF JAMES MACKEY ET AL. PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. RICHARD S. COXE. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Mr. Chitton, for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. Carlisle and Mr. Bradley, for the defendant. Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error to the circuit court for the District of Columbia. The action was brought against the defendant as surety in the administration bond of Austin J. Raines,...
60 U.S. 92 (_) 19 How. 92 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. THE BRIG NEUREA, HER TACKLE, &c., WILLIAM KOHLER, CLAIMANT. Supreme Court of United States. *94 It was argued for the United States by Mr. Cushing, (Attorney General.) Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. The Swedish brig Neurea was seized by the collector of customs at San Francisco, as forfeited to the United States under the passenger act of 1847. The record in this case exhibits the libel for information, filed on...
59 U.S. 476 (1855) 18 How. 476 IN THE MATTER OF THE UNITED STATES v. SHERMAN M. BOOTH. STEPHEN V.R. ABLEMAN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. SHERMAM M. BOOTH. Supreme Court of United States. Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. The court proceed to dispose of the motion made by the attorney-general to docket the case of The United States v. Booth, to stand for argument in this court at the next term. In support of this motion he has produced a copy of the record of the proceedings...
60 U.S. 22 (_) 19 How. 22 WILLIAM THOMAS, SOUTHWORTH BARNES, NATHANIEL RUSSELL, AND OTHERS, OWNERS OF THE BARQUE LAURA, APPELLANTS, v. JAMES W. OSBORN. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Messrs. Brune and Brown for the appellants, and by Messrs. Wallis and J.H. Thomas for the appellee. *25 Mr. Justice CURTIS delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of Maryland, sitting in admiralty. A libel was...
59 U.S. 588 18 How. 588 15 L. Ed. 495 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS, v. WILLIAM G. SHACKLEFORD. December Term, 1855 THIS case came up from the circuit court of the United States for the district of Kentucky, on a certificate of division in opinion between the judges thereof. The point of difference was thus stated. Statement of point of disagreement . The statement of the point upon which the disagreement of the judges happened having been made, is in these words:—— Question of difference . In...
59 U.S. 553 18 How. 553 15 L. Ed. 484 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. CRUZ CERVANTES. December Term, 1855 THIS was an appeal from the district court of the United States for the northern district of California. The nature of the claim is stated in the opinion of the court. The decree of the district court was as follows:—— This cause came on to be heard at the above-stated court, on the transcript and evidence and the arguments of counsel for the United States, and for the claimant Cruz...
