Court : US Supreme Court
Reynolds v. McArthur - 27 U.S. 417 (1829) U.S. Supreme Court Reynolds v. McArthur, 27 U.S. 2 Pet. 417 417 (1829) Reynolds v. McArthur 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 417 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO Syllabus The lands northwest of the River Ohio, between the Rivers Scioto and Little Miami, lying west of Ludlow's Line, east of Roberts' Line, and south of the Indian boundary, reserved by Virginia in her deed of cession to the United States of March, 1784, for the satisfaction of the military bounties Virginia had promised, were not, prior to 1810, by any legislative acts of the government of the United States withdrawn from appropriation under and by virtue of Virginia military land warrants. A patent issued on 12 October, 1812, founded upon a military land warrant for land within the reserved lands is valid against a claimant of the same land holding under a sale made by the United States. This was an action of ejectment brought originally in the Court of Common Pleas for Champaign Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge - 36 U.S. 420 (1837) U.S. Supreme Court Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 36 U.S. 11 Pet. 420 420 (1837) Proprietors of Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of Warren Bridge 36 U.S. (11 Pet.) 420 ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus In 1650, the Legislature of Massachusetts granted to Harvard College the liberty and power to dispose of a ferry by lease or otherwise from Charlestown to Boston, passing over Charles River. The right to set up a ferry between these places had been given by the governor under the authority of the Court of Assistance, by an order dated November 9, 1636, to a particular individual, and was afterwards leased successively to others, they having the privilege of taking tolls regulated in the grant; and when, in 1650, the franchise of this ferry was granted to the college, the rights of the lessees in the same had expired. Under the grant, the college continued to hold the ferry by its le...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Clark v. Smith - 38 U.S. 195 (1838) U.S. Supreme Court Clark v. Smith, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 195 195 (1838) Clark v. Smith 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 195 ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY Syllabus The colonial charters, a great portion of the individual grants by the proprietary and royal governments, and a still greater portion by the states of the Union after the Revolution, were made for lands within the Indian hunting grounds. North Carolina and Virginia, to a great extent, paid their officers and soldiers of the Revolutionary War by such grants, and extinguished the arrears due the army by similar means. It was one of the great resources which sustained the war not only by those states, but by other states. The ultimate fee, encumbered with the right of Indian occupancy, was in the Crown previous to the Revolution, and in the states of the Union afterwards, and subject to grant. This right of occupancy was protected by the political power...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Wilcox v. Jackson - 38 U.S. 498 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Wilcox v. Jackson, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 498 498 (1839) Wilcox v. Jackson 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 498 ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Syllabus Ejectment for a tract of land in Cook County, Illinois, being a fractional section embracing the military post called Fort Dearborn at the time of the institution of the suit, in the possession of the defendant as the commanding officer of the United States. The post was established in 1804, and was occupied by the troops of the United States until August 16, 1812, when the troops were massacred and the fort taken by the enemy. It was reoccupied by the United States in 1816, and continued to be so held until May, 1823, during which time some factory houses, for the use of the Indian Department, were erected on it. It was evacuated by order of the War Department in 1823, and was, by order of the department, again occupied by troops in 1828 as one of the military posts of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Lessee of Pollard's Heirs v. Kibbe - 39 U.S. 353 (1840) U.S. Supreme Court Lessee of Pollard's Heirs v. Kibbe, 39 U.S. 14 Pet. 353 353 (1840) Lessee of Pollard's Heirs v. Kibbe * 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 353 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA Syllabus Action of ejectment in the state court of Alabama for a lot of ground in the City of Mobile. The plaintiff claimed the title to the lot under an act of Congress, and the decision of the state court was against the right and title so set up and claimed. A writ of error was prosecuted to the Supreme Court of Alabama. It was held that this case was embraced by the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which gives this Court jurisdiction to revise the judgment of the state court in such cases. The act of Congress under which title was claimed being a private act and for the benefit of the City of Mobile and certain individuals, it is fair to presume it was passed with reference to the particular claims of indi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Philadelphia & Trenton R. Co. v. Stimpson - 39 U.S. 448 (1840) U.S. Supreme Court Philadelphia & Trenton R. Co. v. Stimpson, 39 U.S. 14 Pet. 448 448 (1840) Philadelphia & Trenton Railroad Company v. Stimpson 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 448 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Syllabus Action for the violation of a patent right, granted to the patentee for "a new and useful improvement in turning short curves on railroads." On 26 September, 1835, a second patent was granted, the original patent, granted in 1831, having been surrendered and cancelled on account of a defective specification, the second patent being for fourteen years from the date of the original patent. The second patent was in the precise form of the original, except the recital of the fact that the former patent was cancelled "on account of a defective specification" and the statement of the time the second patent was to begin to run. It was objected that ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Walden v. Bodley - 39 U.S. 156 (1840) U.S. Supreme Court Walden v. Bodley, 39 U.S. 14 Pet. 156 156 (1840) Walden v. Bodley 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 156 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY Syllabus There are cases in chancery where amendments are permitted at any stage or progress of the cause, as where an essential party has been omitted, but amendments which change the character of the bill or answer so as to make substantially a new case should rarely if ever be admitted after the cause has been set for hearing, much less after it has been heard. A decree dismissing a bill in chancery generally may be set up in bar of a second bill, but where the bill has been dismissed on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction, which shows that the merits were not heard, the dismission is not a bar to a second bill. Where parties by agreement dispense with the usual formalities and no injustice results from the mode adopted, the court should not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Games v. Stiles - 39 U.S. 322 (1840) U.S. Supreme Court Games v. Stiles, 39 U.S. 14 Pet. 322 322 (1840) Games v. Stiles 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 322 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OHIO Syllabus A deed was executed in Glasgow, Scotland, by which land in Ohio, which had been patented to David Buchanan by the United States, was conveyed to Walter Sterling. The deed recited that it was made in pursuance of a decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Virginia. No exemplification of the decree was offered in evidence in support of the deed. The court held that as Buchanan was the patentee of the land, although he made the deed in pursuance of the decree of the Circuit Court of Virginia, the decree could add nothing to the validity of the conveyance, and therefore it was wholly unnecessary to prove the decree. The deed was good without the decree. The possession of a deed, regularly executed, is prima facie evidence of its d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Rhode Island v. Massachusetts - 39 U.S. 210 (1840) U.S. Supreme Court Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 39 U.S. 14 Pet. 210 210 (1840) Rhode Island v. Massachusetts * 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 210 ORIGINAL Syllabus By a rule of the Supreme Court, the practice of the English courts of chancery is the practice in the courts of equity of the United States. In England, the party who puts in a plea which is the subject of discussion has the right to begin and conclude the argument. The same rule should prevail in the courts of the United States in chancery cases. In a case in which two sovereign states of the United States are litigating a question of boundary between them in the Supreme Court of the United States, the Court has decided that the rules and practice of the court of chancery should substantially govern in conducting the suit to a final issue. 37 U. S. 12 Pet. 735-739. The Court, on reexamining the subject, is fully satisfied with the decision. In a controversy where two sove...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Lessee of Brewer v. Blougher - 39 U.S. 178 (1840) U.S. Supreme Court Lessee of Brewer v. Blougher, 39 U.S. 14 Pet. 178 178 (1840) Lessee of Brewer v. Blougher 39 U.S. (14 Pet.) 178 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Syllabus Construction of the Act of the Legislature of Maryland passed December session, 1825, entitled, "An act relating to Illegitimate Children," which provides that "the illegitimate child or children of any female, and the issue of any such child or children," are declared capable in law "to take and inherit both real and personal estate from their mother and from each other, and from the descendants of each other, as the case may be, in like manner as if born in lawful wedlock." J.S., who had several children who were the children of an incestuous connection, conveyed a tract of land in the State of Maryland to one of those children. The grantee died intestate and without issue, seized in fee of the land. Two brothe...
Tag this Judgment!