Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jones v. Le Tombe, (1798)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States Number:  Visitors: 3
Filed: Feb. 09, 1798
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: 3 U.S. 384 (_) 3 Dall. 384 JONES, Indorsee, versus LE TOMBE. Supreme Court of United States. *385 At the opening of the Term, Dallas and Du Ponceau had obtained a rule, that the Plaintiff shew his cause of action, and why the Defendant should not be discharged on filing a common appearance; and now Ingerfoll and E. Tilghman shewed cause, produced the bills of exchange, and the Plaintiff's positive affidavit of a subsisting debt, including a declaration. The Counsel for the Defendant were stopped
More
3 U.S. 384 (____)
3 Dall. 384

JONES, Indorsee,
versus
LE TOMBE.

Supreme Court of United States.

*385 At the opening of the Term, Dallas and Du Ponceau had obtained a rule, that the Plaintiff shew his cause of action, and why the Defendant should not be discharged on filing a common appearance; and now Ingerfoll and E. Tilghman shewed cause, produced the bills of exchange, and the Plaintiff's positive affidavit of a subsisting debt, including a declaration.

The Counsel for the Defendant were stopped when they rose to reply; and THE COURT were unanimously and clearly of opinion, that the contract was made on account of the government; that the credit was given to it as an official engagement; and that, therefore, there was no cause of action against the present Defendant.

The rule was, accordingly, made absolute; and the Plaintiff soon afterwards discontinued the action.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer