Us Supreme Court Court January 1813 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.
Clark's Executors Vs. Carrington
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Clark's Executors v. Carrington - 11 U.S. 308 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Clark's Executors v. Carrington, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 308 308 (1813) Clark's Executors v. Carrington 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 308 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND Syllabus In a case of warranty and indemnity, a judgment against the person to be indemnified, if fairly obtained, especially if obtained on notice to the warrantor, is admissible evidence in a suit against him on his contract of indemnity. A person who, upon receiving an assignment of a share of property as security for a debt, agrees to comply with the contract of the assignor with a joint owner of the property, is bound to fulfill that contract although it exceed in amount the value of the share of the property transferred to him. Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island in an action of assumpsit brought by Carrington against Clark in his lifetime and prosecuted against his executors after his decease to r...
Locke Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Locke v. United States - 11 U.S. 339 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Locke v. United States, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 339 339 (1813) Locke v. United States 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 339 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Syllabus In a count in a libel upon the fiftieth section of the Collection Law of March 2, 1799, for unlading goods without a permit, it is not necessary to state the time and place of importation, nor the vessel in which it was made, but it is sufficient to allege that they were unknown to the attorney. "Probable cause" means less than evidence which would justify condemnation. It imports a seizure made under circumstances which warrant suspicion. Error to the sentence of the Circuit Court for the District of Maryland, which condemned the cargo of the schooner Wendell belonging to Locke, the claimant, as forfeited to the United States. The libel contained 11 counts. The 1st count charged that the goods between 1 June, 1808, and the day of filing the lib...
Caze and Richaud Vs. Baltimore Insurance Company
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Caze & Richaud v. Baltimore Insurance Company - 11 U.S. 358 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Caze & Richaud v. Baltimore Insurance Company, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 358 358 (1813) Caze & Richaud v. Baltimore Insurance Company 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 358 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Syllabus The underwriters upon a cargo are not liable for freight, pro rata itineris to the owner of the vessel who is also owner of the cargo insured in a case where the vessel and cargo were captured, the cargo abandoned to the underwriters as a total loss and by them accepted, the loss paid, the cargo condemned, restored upon appeal, and the proceeds of the cargo paid over to the underwriters. Freight pro rata itineris is not due unless the owner of the cargo voluntarily agrees to receive it at a place short of its ultimate destination. The existence of a lien on a cargo for freight does not vary the legal responsibility of the underwriter on the cargo after abandonment. ...
Maryland Insurance Company Vs. Woods
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Maryland Insurance Company v. Woods - 11 U.S. 402 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Maryland Insurance Company v. Woods, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 402 402 (1813) Maryland Insurance Company v. Woods 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 402 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Syllabus Decided: that the letter of Mr. Merry to the Secretary of State of 12 April, 1804, extended to the Island of Curracoa the order of the lords commissioners of the admiralty of 5 January, 1804, respecting the blockade of Martinique and Guadaloupe. Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Maryland in an action of covenant on a policy upon the schooner William and Mary "at and from Baltimore to Laguira, with liberty of one other neighboring port, and at and from them or either of them back to Baltimore -- warranted by the assured to be an American bottom, proof of which to be required in the United States only." The former judgment of the circuit court in this case having been reversed see ante, 10 U. S. ...
Herbert Vs. Wren
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Herbert v. Wren - 11 U.S. 370 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Herbert v. Wren, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 370 370 (1813) Cranch 370 Herbert v. Wren 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 370 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ALEXANDRIA IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus Courts of chancery have concurrent jurisdiction with courts of law, in cases of dower, especially where partition, discovery, or account is prayed and in cases of sale where the parties are willing that a sum in gross should be given in lieu of dower. If a devise of land in Virginia to the widow appear from circumstances to be intended in lieu of dower, she must make her election, and cannot take both. If a wife join her husband in a lease for years, she is still entitled to dower in the rent. A court of chancery cannot allow a part of the purchase money in lieu of dower when the estate is sold unless by consent of all the parties interested. Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia sitting at Alexandria, in a suit...
Starke Vs. Chesapeake Insurance Company
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Starke v. Chesapeake Insurance Company - 11 U.S. 420 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Starke v. Chesapeake Insurance Company, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 420 420 (1813) Starke v. Chesapeake Insurance Company 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 420 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Syllabus Decided: it need not appear by the record of naturalization that all the requisites prescribed by law for the admission of aliens to the rights of citizenship have been complied with. Semble that the judgment of the court admitting the alien to become a citizen is conclusive that all the prerequisites have been complied with, or that parol proof may be received in aid of the record. Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Maryland in an action of covenant upon a policy of assurance in which the goods insured were warranted to be American property, "proof of which to be required in the United States only." A loss by capture having taken place, the plaintiff offered an abandonment which was refus...
Blackwell Vs. Patton and Erwin's Lessee
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Blackwell v. Patton and Erwin's Lessee - 11 U.S. 471 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Blackwell v. Patton and Erwin's Lessee, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 471 471 (1813) Blackwell v. Patton and Erwin's Lessee 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 471 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE Syllabus By the laws of North Carolina and Tennessee, a deed for land in Tennessee, executed in North Carolina, by grantors residing there in the year 1794, proved in 1797 by one of the subscribing witnesses before a judge in North Carolina, and recorded in 1808 in the proper county in Tennessee, is valid, and may be given in evidence in ejectment. In ejectment, the date of the demise in the declaration may be amended during the trial so as to conform to the title. The first grant from the State of North Carolina upon an entry is valid although issued upon a duplicate warrant, the original being in the hands of the surveyor general, although a subsequent grant issue upon the original warrant for other lands. Er...
The Caroline Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
The Caroline v. United States - 11 U.S. 496 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court The Caroline v. United States, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 496 496 (1813) The Caroline v. United States 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 496 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Syllabus Decided: that a libel for a forfeiture must be particular and certain in all the material circumstances which constitute the offense. An informal libel or information in rem may be amended by leave of the court. Error to the Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina in a case of seizure for violation of the acts of Congress respecting the slave trade. The libel was in the words following: "At a special district court for South Carolina District, be it remembered that on the ___ day of _____ in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and _____ the United States of America, by Thomas Parker, their attorney for the district aforesaid, came here into court and gave Thomas Bee, Esq., Judge of the said court, ...
Palmer Vs. Allen
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
Palmer v. Allen - 11 U.S. 550 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court Palmer v. Allen, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 550 550 (1813) Palmer v. Allen 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 550 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus Decided that in the District Court of Connecticut the marshal may, upon an attachment for debt, without a mittimus, commit the defendant to prison for want of bail. Page 11 U. S. 551 Error to the Supreme Court of Connecticut in an action of false imprisonment brought by Allen against Palmer, who was a deputy marshal of the United States for the District of Connecticut and had served a process of attachment upon Allen and committed him to prison for want of bail, without such a mittimus as is usual upon commitment on like process issuing from the state courts. Palmer pleaded a special justification under the writ of attachment issued out of the District Court of the United States for the District of Connecticut. His plea was, upon demurrer, adjudged bad for want of show...
United States Vs. January and Patterson
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1813
United States v. January & Patterson - 11 U.S. 572 (1813) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. January & Patterson, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 572 572 (1813) United States v. January & Patterson 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 572 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY Syllabus When a collector of revenue has given two a bonds for his official conduct at different periods, and with different sureties, a promise by the supervisor to apply his payments exclusively to the discharge of the first bond, although some of the payments were for money collected and. paid after the second bond was given, does not bind the United States, and does not amount to an application of the payments to the first bond. The debtor has the option, if he thinks fit to exercise it, and may direct the application of any particular payment at the time of making it. If he neglects to make the application, the creditor may make it if he also elects to apply the payment, the law will make the applicat...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »