Citation network
Baker Vs. Humphrey
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1879
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
-
U.S. 494 (1879) U.S. Supreme Court Baker v. HumphreySearch
-
U.S. 494 (1879) Baker v. HumphreySearch
-
of them was in any sense a bona fide purchaser. No one taking a quitclaim deed can stand in that relation. May v. LeClaireSearch
-
and it was made so by the common law. The aid of the statute was not necessary to this result. Clements v. MooreSearch
-
the premises. The facts make a complete case of estoppel in pais. This subject was fully examined in Dickerson v. ColgroveSearch
-
U. S. 578 . We need not go over the same ground again. See also City of Cincinnati v. LesseeSearch
-
Doe v. RosserSearch
-
and Brown v. WheelerSearch
-
The employment to draw the contract was sufficient alone to put the parties in this relation to each other. Galbraith v. ElderSearch
-
Smith v. BrotherlineSearch
-
only for the purpose of the particular transaction in question, it carried with it the same consequences. Williamson v. MoriartySearch
-
the client promptly whenever he has any information to give which it is important the client should receive. Hoops v. BurnettSearch
-
Jett v. HempsteadSearch
-
Fox v. CooperSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Q.B. 827. In Taylor v. BlacklowSearch
-
buy the opposing title without holding it in trust for those then having the title he was employed to sustain. Henry v. RaimanSearch
-
this result. The cases to this effect are very numerous and they are all in harmony. We refer to a few of them. Smith v. BrotherlineSearch
-
Davis v. SmithSearch
-
Wheeler v. WillardSearch
-
Giddings v. EastmanSearch
-
Moore v. BrackenSearch
-
Harper v. PerrySearch
-
Hockenbury v. CarlisleSearch
-
Hobedy v. PetersSearch
-
Case v. CarrollSearch
-
Lewis v. HillmanSearch
-
the renewal enures equally to the benefit of all the original lessees. Burrell v. BullSearch
-
of his interest in the property, the cestui que trust refunding his proportion of the purchase money. Van Horne v. FondaSearch
-
up the obligation of himself and principal, he can enforce it only to the extent of what he paid and interest. Reed v. NorrisSearch
-
in his own right, it was held that he was a trustee and entitled only to be paid what the title cost him. Cleavinger v. ReimarSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Baker v. HumphreySearch
-
May v. LeClaireSearch
-
Clements v. MooreSearch
-
City of Cincinnati v. LesseeSearch
-
Galbraith v. ElderSearch
-
Williamson v. MoriartySearch
-
Hoops v. BurnettSearch
-
In Taylor v. BlacklowSearch
-
Henry v. RaimanSearch
-
Burrell v. BullSearch
-
Van Horne v. FondaSearch
-
Reed v. NorrisSearch
-
Cleavinger v. ReimarSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial