43 U.S. 395 2 How. 395 11 L. Ed. 313 WILLIAM TAYLOR AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS, v. GEORGE M. SAVAGE, EXECUTOR OF SAMUEL SAVAGE, DECEASED, DEFENDANT. January Term, 1844 THIS case came before the court at the last term, and is reported in 1 How., 282. It was brought up again on a motion to dismiss the appeal. Morehead , who made the motion, referred to the decision at the last term, and said that notwithstanding that decision, the case was still here. He considered the opinion of the court as...
43 U.S. 653 2 How. 653 11 L. Ed. 416 WILLIAM R. HANSON, JOSEPH L. MOSS, ISAAC PHILLIPS, JOSEPH M. MOSS, AND DAVID SAMUEL, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. LESSEE OF JOHN H. EUSTACE. January Term, 1844 1 THIS case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States, holden in and for the eastern district of Pennsylvania. It was an ejectment brought by Eustace, a citizen of the state Virginia, against the plaintiffs in error for two pieces of property in the city of Philadelphia;...
44 U.S. 62 (1845) 3 How. 62 JOHN WALKER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTORS OF THE BANK OF WASHINGTON, DEFENDANT IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *71 Brent, for the plaintiff in error. Hellen, for the defendants in error. Mr. Justice WAYNE delivered the opinion of the court. This suit is brought upon a promissory note, given in renewal of a former note, which had been discounted by the defendants in error. The defendants in the court below deny that the plaintiffs have...
43 U.S. 127 (_) 2 How. 127 FRANCOIS FENELON VIDAL, JOHN F. GIRARD, AND OTHERS, CITIZENS AND SUBJECTS OF THE MONARCHY OF FRANCE, AND HENRY STUMP, COMPLAINANTS AND APPELLANTS, v. THE MAYOR, ALDERMEN, AND CITIZENS OF PHILADELPHIA, THE EXECUTORS OF STEPHEN GIRARD, AND OTHERS, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *143 Jones and Webster, for the appellants, who were also the complainants below. Binney and Sergeant, for the defendants. *183 Mr. Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the court....
43 U.S. 210 (_) 2 How. 210 PETER HARMONY AND OTHERS, CLAIMANTS OF THE BRIG MALEK ADHEL, v. THE UNITED STATES. THE UNITED STATES v. THE CARGO OF THE BRIG MALEK ADHEL. Supreme Court of United States. *220 Z. Collins Lee, and R. Johnson, for the United States. Meredith, and Nelson, (attorney-general,) for the claimants. *229 Mr. Justice STORY 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...
43 U.S. 284 (_) 2 How. 284 SIMEON STODDARD, CURTIS STODDARD, DANIEL STODDARD, ANTHONY STODDARD, WILLIAM STODDARD, JOSEPH BUNNELL AND LUCY HIS WIFE, JONAS FOSTER AND LAVINIA HIS WIFE, LUCY HOXIE, DANIEL MORGAN AND AVA HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. HARRY W. CHAMBERS. Supreme Court of United States. *289 Lawless (in writing) and Ewing, for the plaintiffs in error. Jones, for the defendants. *313 Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court. This case is from the Circuit Court of...
43 U.S. 74 (_) 2 How. 74 LUCIUS W. STOCKTON AND DANIEL MOORE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. HARRIET BISHOP, DEFENDANT. Supreme Court of United States. On the 11th of January, 1844, the plaintiff below sued out a writ of fieri facias and placed it in the hands of the marshal, returnable on the 20th of May. Coxe moved to quash the writ of fieri facias, as having been irregularly issued. *75 Mr. Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the court. Upon the facts stated in the application, there is no doubt...
43 U.S. 66 (_) 2 How. 66 SPALDING v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, EX REL. FREDERICK F. BACKUS. Supreme Court of United States. Beardsley moved to dismiss the writ of error in this case, because Spalding had given a bond to The People of the State of New York, or Frederick F. Backus. But Mr. Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the court, and said that the bond was good, and, if forfeited, might be sued upon in the name of the people or of the relator, at the option of the government.
43 U.S. 397 (_) 2 How. 397 JAMES RHODES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. MOSES BELL Supreme Court of United States. *398 Brent and Brent, for the plaintiff in error. Bradley and Hoban, for the defendant. *401 Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court. A writ of error brings this case before us from the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia. Moses Bell, the defendant in error, filed a petition in the Circuit Court representing that he was held in slavery by one James Rhodes, of the said...
43 U.S. 457 (_) 2 How. 457 ROBERT BARNWELL RHETT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ROBERT F. POE, CASHIER OF THE BANK OF AUGUSTA, DEFENDANT. [(a)] Supreme Court of United States. *463 Coxe and Legare, (attorney-general,) for the plaintiff in error. Wilde and Hunt, for the defendant. *478 Mr. Justice DANIEL delivered the opinion of the court. The instrument upon which this suit was instituted in the Circuit Court, was, as the aforegoing statement evinces, in form simply a common promissory note, signed by...
43 U.S. 406 (_) 2 How. 406 JOHN RANDEL, JUN., APPELLANT v. WILLIAM LINN BROWN. WILLIAM LINN BROWN, APPELLANT, v. JOHN RANDEL, JUN. Supreme Court of United States. *414 J.R. Ingersoll and C. Ingersoll, jun., for Randel. J.R. Tyson and Cadwallader, for Brown. *416 Mr. Justice McKINLEY delivered the opinion of the court. Randel filed his bill against Brown, on the chancery side of the Circuit Court of the United States for the eastern district of Pennsylvania. In which he states that, wishing to...
43 U.S. 392 (_) 2 How. 392 WILLIAM J. MINOR, AND CATHARINE HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. SHUBAL TILLOTSON. Supreme Court of United States. Walker, for the plaintiffs in error. Webster, for the defendant. Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court. This case is brought here by a writ of error, to the Circuit Court for the eastern district of Louisiana. The action was commenced in the Circuit Court, to recover possession of certain tracts of land specified in the petition, and for...
43 U.S. 9 (_) 2 How. 9 ALEXANDER G. McNUTT, GOVERNOR OF MISSISSIPPI, WHO SUES FOR THE USE OF LEGGETT, SMITH, AND LAWRENCE, v. RICHARD J. BLAND AND BENJAMIN G. HUMPHREYS. Supreme Court of United States. *12 Jones, for the plaintiffs in error. Walker, for the defendants. Jones contended *13 Mr. Justice BALDWIN delivered the opinion of the court. As the judgment below was rendered on a general demurrer, it is necessary to ascertain in what part of the pleadings the first demurrable defect occurred,...
43 U.S. 608 (_) 2 How. 608 JOHN L. McCRACKEN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. CHARLES HAYWARD. Supreme Court of United States. *611 The case was submitted upon a printed argument by Isaac N. Arnold, counsel for the plaintiff. Mr. Justice BALDWIN delivered the opinion of the court. It appears from the record in this case, that the plaintiff obtained a judgment against the defendant, in June, 1840, on which a pluries fi. fa. issued at May term, 1842; real property was levied on; appraised according to the...
43 U.S. 263 (_) 2 How. 263 JOHN MURPHY AND JOHN DARRINGTON, ADMINISTRATORS OF WILLIAM MATHESON, DECEASED, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. ANGUS STEWART, ADMINISTRATOR OF ALEXANDER GRANT. Supreme Court of United States. *267 Ogden, for the plaintiffs in error. Nelson, (attorney-general,) for the defendants in error. *279 Mr. Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the court. This is the case of a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Alabama. The original...
43 U.S. 497 (_) 2 How. 497 THE LOUISVILLE, CINCINNATI, AND CHARLESTON RAIL-ROAD COMPANY, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THOMAS W. LETSON, DEFENDANT. Supreme Court of United States. *498 Mazyck, for the plaintiffs in error. Pettigru, Lesesne, and Legare, (then attorney-general,) for the defendant in error. *550 Mr. Justice WAYNE delivered the opinion of the court. The jurisdiction of the court is denied in this case upon the grounds that two members of the corporation sued are citizens of North...
43 U.S. 591 (_) 2 How. 591 LESSEE OF JOHN POLLARD, WILLIAM POLLARD, JOHN FOWLER AND HARRIET HIS WIFE, HENRY P. ENSIGN AND PHEBE HIS WIFE, GEORGE HUGGINS AND LOUISA HIS WIFE, JOSEPH CASE AND ELIZA HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. JOSEPH F. FILES, DEFENDANT. Supreme Court of United States. *598 Coxe, for the plaintiff in error. Sergeant, for the defendant. *599 Coxe contended. *601 Mr. Justice CATRON delivered the opinion of the court. For the facts of the case, we refer to the report of it. It...
43 U.S. 426 (_) 2 How. 426 SUSAN LAWRENCE, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ROBERT McCALMONT, HUGH McCALMONT, AND WILLIAM JOHNSON NEWELL, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *435 The cause was argued by Mr. Wood, for the plaintiff in error, (Susan Lawrence,) and was to have been argued by Mr. Lord and Mr. Sergeant, for the defendants in error. *445 Mr. Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error to the Circuit Court for the southern district of New York. On the 21st...
43 U.S. 581 (_) 2 How. 581 SALLY LADIGA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. RICARD DE MARCUS ROLAND, AND PETER HIEFNER, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *588 Coxe, for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Justice BALDWIN delivered the opinion of the court. Both parties claim the land in controversy under the United States, in virtue of the treaty of Washington, made on the 24th March, 1832, between the United States and the chiefs of the Creek tribe of Indians. The decision of the Supreme Court of...
43 U.S. 73 (_) 2 How. 73 BENJAMIN J. KNAPP, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. EDMUND BANKS. Supreme Court of United States. Ogden moved to dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction, which was opposed by Benedict. Mr. Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the court. We entertain no doubt whatsoever upon this question. The amount in controversy is to be decided by the sum in controversy at the time of the judgment, and not by any subsequent additions thereto, such as interest. The distinction constantly...
