88 U.S. 276 (_) 21 Wall. 276 YONLEY v. LAVENDER. Supreme Court of United States. *278 Mr. W.M. Rose, for the plaintiff in error. Mr. A.H. Garland, contra. *279 Mr. Justice DAVIS delivered the opinion of the court. The several States of the Union necessarily have full control over the estates of deceased persons within their respective limits, and we see no ground on which the validity of the sale in question can be sustained. To sustain it would be in effect to nullify the administration laws...
90 U.S. 261 (_) 23 Wall. 261 MASON v. GRAHAM. Supreme Court of United States. *273 Mr. Benjamin Deane, for the appellant; Mr. J.E. Maynadier, contra. Mr. Justice STRONG delivered the opinion of the court. By the arrangement described in Graham's reissued patent of 1867, and claimed as his invention, it is manifest that that part of the device called the rocker is prevented from sliding perceptibly on its bed and is kept true in its bearings by the arm or bar from which the journals are...
87 U.S. 560 (_) 20 Wall. 560 INSURANCE COMPANY v. COLT. Supreme Court of United States. *563 Messrs. F. Chamberlin and E. Hall, for the plaintiff in error. Messrs. H.C. Robinson and R.D. Hubbard, contra. *566 Mr. Justice FIELD delivered the opinion of the court. The charter of the company defendant in the same clause which authorizes its president and directors to make insurance against fire, and for that purpose to execute such "contracts, bargains, agreements, policies, and other instruments"...
90 U.S. 504 23 L. Ed. 160 23 Wall. 504 EX PARTE MEDWAY. October Term, 1874 ON petition for mandamus. The case was thus: Medway had filed a petition in the Court of Claims for the recovery, under the Abandoned and Captured Property Acts, of the proceeds of ninety-four bales of cotton, of which he alleged himself to have been the owner, and which he alleged had been seized and sold by the United States, who now had the net proceeds, $17,386.20, in their treasury. A trial was had, and the court...
91 U.S. 3 (_) WILMINGTON AND WELDON RAILROAD COMPANY v. KING, EXECUTOR. Supreme Court of United States. Submitted on printed argument by Mr. J.M. Carlisle and Mr. J.D. McPherson for the plaintiff in error. No counsel appeared for the defendant in error. MR. JUSTICE FIELD delivered the opinion of the court. The contract between the defendant and the plaintiff's testatrix, upon which the present action was brought, was made in North Carolina during the war. By its terms, the wood purchased by the...
91 U.S. 580 (_) DAINESE v. COOKE ET AL. Supreme Court of United States. Mr. F.P. Cuppy and Mr. John W. Ross for the appellant, and Mr. Edwin L. Stanton for the appellees. MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. These are appeals by Dainese in two cases from decrees of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, in one of which he was complainant, and his bill was dismissed. In the other *581 he was defendant, and a perpetual injunction was decreed against him. As the subject-...
88 U.S. 130 (_) 21 Wall. 130 DUPASSEUR v. ROCHEREAU. Supreme Court of United States. *134 Mr. A.C. Story, for the plaintiff in error; Messrs. E. and A.C. Janin (with whom was Mr. Charles Andrew Johnson), contra. Mr. Justice BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the court. Where a State court refuses to give effect to the judgment of a court of the United States rendered upon the point in dispute, and with jurisdiction of the case and the parties, a question is undoubtedly raised which, under the act...
88 U.S. 609 (_) 21 Wall. 609 NATIONAL BANK v. COLBY. Supreme Court of United States. *611 Mr. Alexander White, in support of the judgment below. Messrs. P. Phillips and C. Case, contra. *612 Mr. Justice FIELD delivered the opinion of the court. Two questions are presented in this case for our determination: 1st, whether the property of a National bank organized under the act of Congress of June 3d, 1864, [*] attached at the suit of an individual creditor, after the bank has become insolvent,...
88 U.S. 648 (_) 21 Wall. 648 VIGO'S CASE: EX PARTE UNITED STATES. Supreme Court of United States. *649 Mr. J.S. Blair, for the United States (with whom were Mr. G.H. Williams, Attorney-General, and Mr. John Goforth, Assistant Attorney-General). Mr. William Penn Clarke, contra. The CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the court. The Court of Claims, by the terms of the act under which it is organized, has jurisdiction, among other things, to hear and determine all claims which may be referred...
91 U.S. 618 (_) DOWS ET AL. v. NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF MILWAUKEE. Supreme Court of United States. *624 Mr. C. Van Santvoord for the plaintiffs in error. Mr. H.M. Finch for the defendant in error. *629 MR. JUSTICE STRONG delivered the opinion of the court. The verdict of the jury having established that the wheat came to the possession of the defendants below (now plaintiffs in error), and that there was a conversion, there is really no controversy respecting any other fact in this case than...
88 U.S. 36 22 L. Ed. 527 21 Wall. 36 GARDNER v. BROWN. October Term, 1874 APPEAL from the Circuit Court for the Middle District of Tennessee; the case being thus: The Code of Tennessee 1 enacts that every trustee to whom property is conveyed in trust for any person, 'before entering upon the discharge of his duty shall give bond,' &c., for the faithful discharge of his duties. But the act does not declare that if he does not give the bonds he shall cease to be trustee. An act of Congress of...
89 U.S. 381 (_) 22 Wall. 381 MORGAN v. CAMPBELL, ASSIGNEE. Supreme Court of United States. *385 Mr. J.A. Sleeper, for Morgan, the appellant. Mr. Adolphe Moses, contra, for the assignee. *389 Mr. Justice DAVIS delivered the opinion of the court. The bill in this case cannot be sustained unless the laws of Illinois conferred upon the landlord a statutory lien upon the personal property of the tenant in the county prior to the levy of the warrant. If the lien existed independently of the warrant,...
87 U.S. 655 (_) 20 Wall. 655 LOAN ASSOCIATION v. TOPEKA. Supreme Court of United States. *658 Mr. Alfred Ennis, for the plaintiff in error; Messrs. Ross, Burns, and A.L. Williams, contra. Mr. Justice MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. Two grounds are taken in the opinion of the circuit judge and in the argument of counsel for defendant, on which it is insisted that the section of the statute of February 29th, 1872, on which the main reliance is placed to issue the bonds, is...
87 U.S. 652 22 L. Ed. 449 20 Wall. 652 TREAT v. JEMISON. October Term, 1874 1 ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of California. 2 Rule twenty-one of this court provides that the brief of the counsel for the plaintiff in error shall contain, ' in the order here stated ,'—— 3 1. A statement of the case, &c. 4 '2. An assignment of the errors relied upon, which, in cases brought up by writ of error, shall set out separately and specifically each error asserted and intended to be urged.' 5...
88 U.S. 73 (_) 21 Wall. 73 HAMILTON v. DILLIN. Supreme Court of United States. *81 Messrs. W.M. Evarts and T.D. Lincoln (with whom were Messrs. C. Cole and E. Jordan), for the plaintiffs in error. Mr. G.H. Williams, Attorney-General, and Mr. S.F. Phillips, Solicitor-General, contra. *86 Mr. Justice BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the court. There can be no question that the condition requiring the *87 payment of four cents per pound for a permit to purchase cotton in, and transport it from,...
90 U.S. 321 23 L. Ed. 143 23 Wall. 321 SLACK v. TUCKER & C . October Term, 1874 ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts. Tucker & Co., partners, sued, in the said court, Slack, collector of internal revenue in the city of Boston, to recover the amount of certain taxes paid by them under protest, and which they alleged to have been illegally assessed. The court, having tried the cause without a jury, held the tax illegal and a recovery was had. This writ of error was brought...
89 U.S. 464 (_) 22 Wall. 464 HUNNEWELL v. CASS COUNTY. Supreme Court of United States. *470 Mr. J.M. Woolworth, for the appellants. Mr. Clinton Briggs, contra. *475 Mr. Justice MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. The ground of exemption claimed by the bill in this case, so far as not disposed of by the case of Railroad Company v. McShane, just decided, rests upon the allegation that the costs of selecting, surveying, and conveying the lands had not been paid at the time of their...
91 U.S. 426 (_) NUDD ET AL. v. BURROWS, ASSIGNEE. Supreme Court of United States. *435 Mr. W.H. Swift and Mr. W.C. Grant, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. H.W. Tenney, H.M. Lewis, and J.C. McKenney, contra. *437 MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE delivered the opinion of the court. The first of the assignments of error presents the question, whether the court erred in admitting in evidence the declarations of the bankrupt. The suit was brought by the assignee to recover against Nudd and Noe for money and...
91 U.S. 72 (_) UNITED STATES v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. Supreme Court of United States. *74 Mr. Attorney-General Pierrepont for the appellant. *77 Mr. Sidney Bartlett and Mr. E.W. Stoughton for appellee. *78 MR. JUSTICE DAVIS delivered the opinion of the court. The Union Pacific Railroad Company, conceding the right of the government to retain one-half of the compensation due it for the transportation of the mails, military and Indian supplies, and apply the same to reimburse the...
91 U.S. 415 (_) FIRST UNITARIAN SOCIETY OF CHICAGO v. FAULKNER ET AL. Supreme Court of United States. Submitted on printed briefs by Mr. Daniel L. Shorey for the plaintiff in error, and by Messrs. R.M. Corwine, Quinton Corwine, & J.A.L. Whittier, contra. MR. JUSTICE CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court. Services were rendered by the plaintiffs, as architects, in making plans and designs, and in furnishing drawings, specifications, and estimates for the corporation defendants, preparatory...
