Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Conner Vs. Long

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 01, 1881

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

69 entries 8 linked 61 unlinked
Show
  1. Pulliam Vs. Osborne US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1854
  2. Taylor Vs. Carryl US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1857
  3. Freeman Vs. Howe US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1860
  4. Livingston Vs. Smith US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1831
  5. Bank Vs. Sherman US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1879
  6. Buck Vs. Colbath US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1865
  7. Dynes Vs. Hoover US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1857
    Relied / Followed
  8. Eyster Vs. Gaff US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1875
  9. U.S. 228 (1881) U.S. Supreme Court Conner v. Long
    Search
  10. U.S. 228 (1881) Conner v. Long
    Search
  11. In Hampton v. Rouse
    Search
  12. by force of law and without regard to the knowledge or the motives of the claimant, overreached and defeated. Bank v. Sherman
    Search
  13. of the petition in bankruptcy, in which case the title of the assignee vests in the proceeds of sale. In Duffield v. Horton
    Search
  14. and cites in support of it the cases of Johnson v. Bishop
    Search
  15. Woolw. 324, and Bradley v. Frost
    Search
  16. Dill. 457. The former of these cases, Johnson v. Bishop
    Search
  17. P. 328. And in support of this conclusion, reliance was had upon the cases of Hagan v. Lucas
    Search
  18. and Buck v. Colbath
    Search
  19. Wall. 334. The principle of this decision was expressed in the opinion of the Court in the case of Doe v. Childress
    Search
  20. The case of Johnson v. Bishop
    Search
  21. of the property at the suit of the assignee, who at the time of the sale had become in law its owner. Bradley v. Frost
    Search
  22. in its circumstances from the present, and in that the circuit judge, upon the principle decided in Johnson v. Bishop
    Search
  23. rem. The case is thus brought within the terms of the first of the two classes of legal process described in Buck v. Colbath
    Search
  24. liable, and the servant cannot justify under orders from a master, for, as was said by Lord Ellenborough in Stephens v. Elwall
    Search
  25. employment when the act complained of is in the discharge of a duty to the public incident thereto, as in Greenway v. Fisher
    Search
  26. of duty and of liability is thus stated with admirable Page 104 U. S. 238 force by Hosmer, C.J., in Watson v. Watson
    Search
  27. P. 147. So in Savacool v. Boughton
    Search
  28. unless the want of jurisdiction appears by such process. The same rule was sustained by Nelson, C.J., in Webber v. Gay
    Search
  29. id. 485. In Wilmarth v. Burt
    Search
  30. To the same effect are Twitchell v. Shaw
    Search
  31. Cush. (Mass.) 46, and Clarke v. May
    Search
  32. Gray (Mass.) 410. The same principle was applied to the proceedings of a court-martial by this Court in Dynes v. Hoover
    Search
  33. and has no choice but to obey. The language of MR. JUSTICE MILLER in delivering the opinion of this court in Eyster v. Gaff
    Search
  34. The court below took a different view of the law, following a prior decision in the same circuit in Miller v. O'Brien
    Search
  35. referring to Balme v. Hutton
    Search
  36. Bing. 471, and Garland v. Carlisle
    Search
  37. They are entitled, certainly, to very respectful examination. The principal case in England is that of Cooper v. Chitty
    Search
  38. Lord Mansfield's decision in that case controlled the course of judicial opinion upon the question until Balme v. Hutton
    Search
  39. authorities that in such a case, the sheriff had been uniformly protected by his process, and concluded that Cooper v. Chitty
    Search
  40. as before. He then proceeded to show that the subsequent decisions had overlooked the distinction on which Cooper v. Chitty
    Search
  41. and gave judgment for the defendant. But this judgment was reversed in 1833 by the Court of Exchequer Chamber. Balme v. Hutton
    Search
  42. Cromp. & M. 262. The question came finally before the House of Lords in the year 1837, in the case of Garland v. Carlisle
    Search
  43. of the question, and we are not now left at liberty to form an opinion upon it. I do not, however, think that Cooper v. Chitty
    Search
  44. the present. Indeed, some relief had been introduced by the Bankrupt Act of 6 Geo. IV, c. 16, passed in 1825. Edwards v. Scarsbrook
    Search
  45. Slater v. Pinder
    Search
  46. U.S. Supreme Court Conner v. Long
    Search
  47. In Duffield v. Horton
    Search
  48. of Johnson v. Bishop
    Search
  49. and Bradley v. Frost
    Search
  50. Johnson v. Bishop
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial