Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Spencer Vs. Lapsley

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 01, 1857

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

43 entries 2 linked 41 unlinked
Show
  1. Bailey Vs. Dozier US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1848
    Relied / Followed
  2. Sims Vs. Hundley US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1848
  3. U.S. 264 (1857) U.S. Supreme Court Spencer v. Lapsley
    Search
  4. U.S. 20 How. 264 264 (1857) Spencer v. Lapsley
    Search
  5. if any, what orders, in a suit in which he is interested. This was much discussed in the Grand Junction Canal Company v. Dimes
    Search
  6. in bar. Such pleading was contrary to the rule and practice of the courts, and was properly disallowed. Shepperd v. Graves
    Search
  7. Drake v. Brander
    Search
  8. cause which has been legally dismissed, cannot be questioned for error in this Court. Marine Ins. Co. of Alexandria v. Hodgson
    Search
  9. by the parties cannot be collaterally impeached for the want of the signature. Secombe Page 61 U. S. 270 v. Steele
    Search
  10. that lands in a colony thus situated might be sold without reference to the empresario in such a contract. Houston v. Robertson
    Search
  11. Jenkins v. Chambers
    Search
  12. was excluded from their contract in 1834, when Robertson's contract was renewed, and was restored in 1835. Houston v. Perry
    Search
  13. to complete the titles on a contract of sale, where no organization of the colony had taken place. The case of Clay v. Holbert
    Search
  14. who officiated in this case, completed the title. The Supreme Court of Texas determined the grant to be valid. Watrons v. McGrew
    Search
  15. Ryon v. Jackson
    Search
  16. Hancock v. McKenny
    Search
  17. was treated as a substantial compliance with the law. A surveyor might adopt the surveys of other persons. Jones v. Menard
    Search
  18. Howard v. Perry
    Search
  19. Horton v. Pace
    Search
  20. Doswell v. Lanzo
    Search
  21. How. 235. In Hoofnagle v. Anderson
    Search
  22. In Boardman v. Reed
    Search
  23. White v. Burnley
    Search
  24. a deputy or other person, as marks of irregularity or of malpractice, our opinion could not be affected. In Stevenson v. Newman
    Search
  25. And this Court, after a full review of the subject, in Field v. Seabury
    Search
  26. Page 61 U. S. 274 Edwards v. James
    Search
  27. Considered as the act of a foreign officer, without the support of this proof, the Supreme Court of Texas, in Paschal v. Perez
    Search
  28. question, and which was not settled. Story's Conf.Laws 634. But the court in that case, and in the case of De Leon v. White
    Search
  29. U.S. Supreme Court Spencer v. Lapsley
    Search
  30. the Grand Junction Canal Company v. Dimes
    Search
  31. Shepperd v. Graves
    Search
  32. Court. Marine Ins. Co. of Alexandria v. Hodgson
    Search
  33. Houston v. Robertson
    Search
  34. Houston v. Perry
    Search
  35. of Clay v. Holbert
    Search
  36. Watrons v. McGrew
    Search
  37. Jones v. Menard
    Search
  38. In Hoofnagle v. Anderson
    Search
  39. In Stevenson v. Newman
    Search
  40. Edwards v. James
    Search
  41. Paschal v. Perez
    Search
  42. of De Leon v. White
    Search
  43. Field v. Seabury
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial