Citation network
Smyth Vs. Strader
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1847
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
- Distinguished
-
U.S. 404 (1847) U.S. Supreme Court Smyth v. StraderSearch
-
U.S. 4 How. 404 404 (1847) Smyth v. StraderSearch
-
is not admissible. This Court again recognizes the rule upon this subject established in the case of Henderson v. AndersonSearch
-
by the general commercial law. Such seems to be the opinion of the Supreme Court of Alabama. In the case of McDonald v. HustedSearch
-
Also in Beal v. BennettSearch
-
that would be to sue himself. But a bona fide assignee of Stevenson might maintain an action. Jones, Assignees v. YatesSearch
-
Bosanquet v. WraySearch
-
Aubert v. MazeSearch
-
Smith v. LusherSearch
-
conduced to show the fraud of Stevenson in the execution of the notes. In the case of Bank of the United States v. DunnSearch
-
The same principle was held in Bank of Metropolis v. JonesSearch
-
Pet. 12. This was decided in the case of Walton v. ShelleySearch
-
Term 296, and although that decision was overruled by the King's Bench in the case of Jordaine v. LashbrookeSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
judgment on this point. Strader was a party on the record, and that rendered him an incompetent witness. Scott v. LloydSearch
-
competency of Strader to depose, in the principal opinion, is held to be governed by the cases of United States Bank v. DunnSearch
-
Pet. 51, and Bank of Metropolis v. JonesSearch
-
and the decision in Walton v. ShelleySearch
-
and refers to Bent v. BakerSearch
-
Term 36, and Page 45 U. S. 419 Jordaine v. LashbrookeSearch
-
This was the principle on which the cases of Bent v. BakerSearch
-
and Jordaine v. LashbrookeSearch
-
of Great Britain. It is also settled, and had been long before 1832, when the decision in Bank of the United States v. DunnSearch
-
was made, in a large majority of the states of this Union, in accordance with the principles laid down in Jordaine v. LashbrookeSearch
-
and Bent v. BakerSearch
-
and that they were, beyond dispute, parties to it as well as the defendant. The principle assumed in Walton v. ShelleySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Smyth v. StraderSearch
-
of Henderson v. AndersonSearch
-
of McDonald v. HustedSearch
-
Beal v. BennettSearch
-
Jones, Assignees v. YatesSearch
-
of Bank of the United States v. DunnSearch
-
Bank of Metropolis v. JonesSearch
-
of Walton v. ShelleySearch
-
of Jordaine v. LashbrookeSearch
-
of United States Bank v. DunnSearch
-
and Bank of Metropolis v. JonesSearch
-
Walton v. ShelleySearch
-
Bent v. BakerSearch
-
Jordaine v. LashbrookeSearch
-
of Bent v. BakerSearch
-
Scott v. LloydSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial