5 U.S. 45 (_) 1 Cranch 45 GEORGE WILSON v. RICHARD MASON, DEVISEE OF GEORGE MASON. AND RICHARD MASON, DEVISEE OF GEORGE MASON, v. GEORGE WILSON. Supreme Court of United States. *55 *56 *Daveiss, for plaintiff in error. *56 Mason, for defendant in error. Lee, for the plaintiff in error. Mason, for defendant in error. *87 The court took time till this term to consider, and now the Chief Justice delivered the following opinion: Opinion of the Court. This is a writ of error to a judgment of the...
5 U.S. 116 (_) 1 Cranch 116 TURNER v. FENDALL. Supreme Court of United States. *120 The case was now argued by Simms, for the plaintiff in error, and by C. Lee and Swann, for the defendant. For the plaintiff in error, it was contended. *128 The Chief Justice delivered the opinion of the court. This was a motion made by the defendant in error against the now plaintiff, in the circuit court at Alexandria, under an act of the Virginia assembly, which declares that "if any sheriff, under sheriff or...
5 U.S. 103 1 Cranch 103 2 L. Ed. 49 The UNITED STATES v. The SCHOONER PEGGY. December 1, 1801 ERROR to the circuit court of Connecticut. The schooner Peggy was captured as prize by the United States armed vessel, the Trumbull, David Jewitt, Esq. commander, instructed to take any armed vessel or vessels, sailing under the authority or pretence of authority of the French Republic. The capture was made upon the 24th of April 1800, and she was sent into the district of Connecticut, and was there...
5 U.S. 1 (_) 1 Cranch 1 SILAS TALBOT v. HANS FREDERIC SEEMAN. Supreme Court of United States. *5 *The cause now came on to be argued at August *6 term, 1801, by Bayard and Ingersol, for the libellant, and Dallas, Mason and Levy, for the claimant. *25 August 11. MARSHALL, Ch. J. delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error to a decree of the circuit court for the district of New-York, by which the decree of the district court of that state, restoring the ship Amelia to her owner...
5 U.S. 110 (_) 1 Cranch 110 JACOB RESLER v. JAMES SHEHEE. Supreme Court of United States. *111 The cause was, at this term, argued by C. Lee, for plaintiff in error, and Simms and Mason, for defendant. *113 CHASE. J. Have the rules of the Virginia courts been adopted in the circuit court *114 Lee. I conceive the circuit court of Alexandria to be in the same situation as the district court at Richmond. And, as I understand the act of congress, they are obliged to adopt the practice of the...
4 U.S. 354 4 Dall. 354 1 L. Ed. 864 Penn v. Butler. Butler v. Penn. Penn v. Penn. Same v. Same. Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District. May Term, 1801 1 THESE were bills in equity, involving a great variety of facts respecting the disposition of the estates of the late proprietary family: but the principal object of all of them, was submitted for the opinion of the Court, on the following agreement: 2 'It is agreed, that these suits be submitted for the opinion of the Court, upon the following...
4 U.S. 353 4 Dall. 353 1 L. Ed. 864 Hurst's Lessee v. Jones. Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District. May Term, 1801 1 A FORMER ejectment, between the same parties, for the same land, had been non pros'd; but the costs of suit remained unpaid. 2 The defendant's counsel objected to the trial of the present ejectment, until the costs of the former were paid. 3 By the COURT. 4 The objection is reasonable and just. The defendant cannot, under such circumstances, be compelled to proceed to a trial. 5...
4 U.S. 353 (_) 4 Dall. 353 Hollingsworth v. Duane. Supreme Court of United States. *354 The COURT After a long advisement upon the subject, seemed to think, that alienage might have been a cause of challenge, before the juror was sworn; but, upon an extensive review of the authorities, they decided, that advantage could not be taken of it, after verdict. Rule discharged. [(1)] NOTES [(1)] Since the discussion of this case, the marshal has been directed not to return aliens upon the panel; and,...
4 U.S. 229 (_) 4 Dall. 229 The Commonwealth versus Dallas, Attorney of the United States, &c. Supreme Court of United States. *230 The argument was conducted, with great and equal ability and candour, by Messrs. Hopkinson, E. Tilghman, and Lewis, in support of the motion; and by Messrs. Ingersoll and M`Kean, against it. *231 SHIPPEN, Chief Justice: That although the Recorder of the city of Philadelphia possesses some powers, and performs some duties, of a judicial nature, he is not a judge,...
4 U.S. 225 (_) 4 Dall. 225 Commonwealth versus Addison. Supreme Court of United States. In support of the motion, the attorney-general. But, by the COURT: We are, unanimously, of opinion, that the case does not present to our consideration an indictable offence; and, of course, it is not a case, in which an information ought to be granted. But we are (with the same unanimity) of opinion, that every judge has a right, and, emphatically, that it is his duty, to deliver his sentiments upon every...
4 U.S. 227 4 Dall. 227 1 L. Ed. 811 Austyn v. M'Lure. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. September Term, 1801 1 CASE, on a special assumpsit . The declaration contained three counts, of each of which the following is the substance. 2 1 st Count . After stating that a controversy subsisted between the plaintiff, and one Rowson (a British merchant for whom the defendant was agent) that they had agreed to enter an amicable action and reference, in the Federal Circuit Court, and that the referees met...
