Citation network
Cary Vs. Curtis
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1845
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 236 (1845) U.S. Supreme Court Cary v. CurtisSearch
-
U.S. 3 How. 236 236 (1845) Cary v. CurtisSearch
-
down by this Court with Page 44 U. S. 240 respect to collectors of the revenue, in the case of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
Pet. 137, and again incidentally in the case of Bend v. HoytSearch
-
for it is very material in seeking for the views of Congress in this enactment, that the Court, in the case of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
operation of this section upon the conclusions either directly announced or as implied in the decision of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
and as it removed the implications on which the decision of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
stand affected. The action of assumpsit for money had and received, it is said by Ld. Mansfield, Burr. 1012, Moses v. MacfarlenSearch
-
the defendant is obliged by the ties of natural justice and equity to refund. And by Buller, Justice, in Stratton v. RastallSearch
-
pay over the fund received to his principal. This doctrine is believed to be sanctioned by the cases of Greenaway v. HurdSearch
-
T.R. 553, of Coles v. WrightSearch
-
Taunt. 198, and of Tope v. HockinSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
but here, so far from there being such an engagement, they repudiated it altogether. Williams v. EverettSearch
-
money received by the clerk, there was no privity of contract between the present plaintiff and the defendant. Stevens v. BadcockSearch
-
Barn. & A. 354. So in the case of Sims v. BrittainSearch
-
part-owners and C., and consequently that the action was not maintainable. To the same effect are the cases of Rogers v. KellySearch
-
Campb. 123, and Edden v. ReadSearch
-
id. 339, and Wedlake v. HusleySearch
-
the action. It was upon this principle that the action for money had and received was sustained in the case of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
exactions of officers of the Crown. Mr. Justice Bayley laid down the general principle with great exactness in Shaw v. WoodcockSearch
-
In Irving v. WilsonSearch
-
not legally due thereon has been, upon the most solemn deliberation, held by this Court in the cases of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
Pet. 137, and Bend v. HoytSearch
-
mockery of justice. And this is the very doctrine affirmed in its full extent by this Court in the cases of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
it differs from the case of a voluntary payment. This distinction was taken and acted upon in the case of Snowden v. DavisSearch
-
And the same doctrine was fully recognized and confirmed by this Court upon the most solemn consideration in Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
In the case of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
Pet. 137, and in Bend v. HoytSearch
-
is answerable for that violation. This must be the case unless, in the language of this Court in the case of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
In Townson v. WilsonSearch
-
The same doctrine is held in Sadler v. EvansSearch
-
Burr. 1986. And this Court in the above case of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
And in Tracy v. SwartwoutSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Cary v. CurtisSearch
-
of Elliott v. SwartwoutSearch
-
of Bend v. HoytSearch
-
Moses v. MacfarlenSearch
-
Stratton v. RastallSearch
-
of Greenaway v. HurdSearch
-
of Coles v. WrightSearch
-
and of Tope v. HockinSearch
-
Williams v. EverettSearch
-
Stevens v. BadcockSearch
-
of Sims v. BrittainSearch
-
of Rogers v. KellySearch
-
and Edden v. ReadSearch
-
and Wedlake v. HusleySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial