Grubb'S Ex'Rs vs. Grubb'S Ex'Rs

Grubb'S Ex'Rs vs Grubb'S Ex'Rs

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1792

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/78052

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/78052
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1792
Case Number: 2 U.S. 191
Subject: Arbitration

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Arbitration

Key legal issue: Arbitration

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Grubb'S Ex'Rs

Respondent

Grubb'S Ex'Rs

Excerpt

grubb's ex'rs v. grubb's ex'rs - 2 u.s. 191 (1792) u.s. supreme court grubb's ex'rs v. grubb's ex'rs, 2 u.s. 191 (1792) 2 u.s. 191 (dall.) grubb's executors v. grubb's executors supreme court of pennsylvania september term, 1792 this cause being referred in the common pleas, the referrees made report into office; and afterwards the plaintiff removed the cause by certiorari into this court. page 2 u.s. 191, 192 but ingersoll, on behalf of the defendant, now moved for a procedendo; alledging that in a case of pigot v. young, it had been decided, that a cause could not be removed after the arbitrators, or referees, had entered on the business submitted, or referred, to them. and the court, accordingly, awarded a procedendo.

Full Judgment

GRUBB'S EX'RS v. GRUBB'S EX'RS - 2 U.S. 191 (1792)
U.S. Supreme Court GRUBB'S EX'RS v. GRUBB'S EX'RS, 2 U.S. 191 (1792)

2 U.S. 191 (Dall.)

Grubb's Executors
v.
Grubb's Executors

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

September Term, 1792

This cause being referred in the Common Pleas, the referrees made report into office; and afterwards the plaintiff removed the cause by certiorari into this Court.

Page 2 U.S. 191, 192

But Ingersoll, on behalf of the defendant, now moved for a Procedendo; alledging that in a case of Pigot v. Young, it had been decided, that a cause could not be removed after the arbitrators, or referees, had entered on the business submitted, or referred, to them.

And the Court, accordingly, awarded a Procedendo.

Same Parties Grubb'S Ex'Rs vs Grubb'S Ex'Rs Same Subject Arbitration