Us Supreme Court Court January 1763 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Price Vs. Watkins
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1763
PRICE v. WATKINS - 1 U.S. 8 (1763) U.S. Supreme Court PRICE v. WATKINS , 1 U.S. 8 (1763) 1 U.S. 8 (Dall.) Price v. Watkins Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April Term, 1763 Special Verdict. The Question arose on these Words of a Will. Item my Will is that after my Wife Ruth Price's Decease, or if she shall alter her Condition and marry, then in such Case i devise and bequeath unto my loving Friends I. W. and M. K. or to any one of them, in case the other should die, in Trust and for the Intent to sell and convey all that Mefluage & c. to any Person or Persons that shall purchase the same, and the Money arising from the Sale of the Premises shall be di ided between my Children herein after named, when they attain severally to the Age of 21 Years or be married, which shall first happen. Samuel Price one of the Children attained the Age of 21 Years and married, and afterwards died intestate and without issue, in the life Time of the Testators Widow Ruth Price, who did never marry agai...
Wallace Vs. Child and Styles
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1763
WALLACE v. CHILD AND STYLES - 1 U.S. 7 (1763) U.S. Supreme Court WALLACE v. CHILD AND STYLES , 1 U.S. 7 (1763) 1 U.S. 7 (Dall.) Thomas Wallace v. Child and Styles Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April Term, 1763 Suit on a Policy of Insurance. It was set forth in the Declaration that the Vessel sprung a Leak at Sea, and put into Providence, through Necessity. The Master of the Ship was produced by the Plaintiff as a Witness to prove the Bill of Lading, and to give a general Account of the Transactions on board the Vessel and at Providence. His admission was opposed, because the Captain himself had Goods on board which were insured, and the Money was refused to be paid by the Underwriters on his Policy till this Suit was determined, and therefore he was interested. But it was answered, that the Master of the Ship was the only Person who can be supposed capable of giving a full Account of the Matter; and part of the Defence in this Case being, that the Goods insured were innumerat...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›