Cartwright Vs. Howe

Cartwright vs Howe

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1843

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/79821

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/79821
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1843
Case Number: 42 U.S. 188
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

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

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cartwright

Respondent

Howe

Excerpt

cartwright v. howe - 42 u.s. 188 (1843) u.s. supreme court cartwright v. howe, 42 u.s. 188 (1843) 42 u.s. 188 (how.) elizabeth r. cartwright, plaintiff in error, v. alexander t. howe, george f. richards, and william richards, defendants. january term, 1843 this cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the circuit court of the united states for the district of columbia, holden in and for the county of washington, and it having been stated by mr. bradley, of counsel for the defendant in error, that the matters in controversy had been agreed and settled between the parties, to which mr. r. j. brent, of counsel for the plaintiff in error, assented; it is thereupon now here ordered and adjudged by this court that this cause be and the same is hereby dismissed, with costs.

Full Judgment

CARTWRIGHT v. HOWE - 42 U.S. 188 (1843)
U.S. Supreme Court CARTWRIGHT v. HOWE, 42 U.S. 188 (1843)

42 U.S. 188 (How.)

ELIZABETH R. CARTWRIGHT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
ALEXANDER T. HOWE, GEORGE F. RICHARDS, AND WILLIAM RICHARDS, DEFENDANTS.

January Term, 1843

THIS cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Columbia, holden in and for the county of Washington, and it having been stated by Mr. Bradley, of counsel for the defendant in error, that the matters in controversy had been agreed and settled between the parties, to which Mr. R. J. Brent, of counsel for the plaintiff in error, assented; it is thereupon now here ordered and adjudged by this court that this cause be and the same is hereby dismissed, with costs.

Same Parties Cartwright vs Howe Same Subject MRTP