Us Supreme Court Court January 1839 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.
Rhode Island Vs. Massachusetts
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Rhode Island v. Massachusetts - 38 U.S. 23 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 23 23 (1839) Rhode Island v. Massachusetts 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 23 ORIGINAL Syllabus The State of Rhode Island, on leave granted at January Term, 1838, to amend a bill previously filed by the state against the State of Massachusetts, amended the bill at this term by inserting in it references to papers filed at the term of 1838. The State of Massachusetts was allowed until the term of 1840 to answer. The rules which govern courts of equity as to the allowance of time for filing an answer and other proceedings in suits between individuals will not be applied by the Supreme Court to controversies between states of the Union. The parties in such cases must, in the nature of things, be incapable of acting with the promptness of an individual. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TANEY delivered the opinion of the Court.: A motion was made by the complainant on Saturday last for an order...
Andrews Vs. Pond
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Andrews v. Pond - 38 U.S. 65 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Andrews v. Pond, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 65 65 (1839) Andrews v. Pond 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 65 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA Syllabus A bill of exchange, in payment of a debt due on a protested bill, was taken in New York from one of the parties to the protested bill. The exchange between Mobile, on which the bill was drawn, was stated to be ten percentum, and was added to the bill, and the damages on the protested bill, with interest, at the rate of interest in New York, from the time the first bill was protested, were added to the bill. It was sent to Mobile and was placed to the credit of the drawees by the endorsee, who received it before it came to maturity. The bill was afterwards protested for nonpayment. An action was brought in Alabama against the endorsers of the bill, one of whom was in New York when the bill was drawn, and who, being liable to suit on the protested bil...
Bradley Vs. Washington, A. and G.S.P. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Bradley v. Washington, A. & G.S.P. Co. - 38 U.S. 89 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Bradley v. Washington, A. & G.S.P. Co., 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 89 89 (1839) Bradley v. Washington, Alexandria and Georgetown Steam Packet Company 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 89 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus The plaintiff in error had, by an agreement in writing, hired a steamboat to be put "on the route" from Washington, in the District of Columbia, to Potomac Creek until another steamboat then building should be prepared and be put "on the route." The plaintiff in error was the contractor for carrying the mail of the United States, which was carried in a steamboat to Potomac Creek, except in winter, when the navigation of the River Potomac was interrupted by ice, when the mail was carried by land. The steamboat so hired was employed in carrying the mail. The ice prevented the use of the steamboat, and the owners claimed under the contract ...
Walker Vs. Parker
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Walker v. Parker - 38 U.S. 166 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Walker v. Parker, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 166 166 (1839) Walker v. Parker 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 166 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus The testator devised to his wife one-third of his personal estate forever for her own proper use and benefit, and also one-third of all his real estate during her lifetime, and in the event of her death, all the right in real property bequeathed to her should be, and by the will is, declared to be vested in his infant son. The testator then proceeded to devise sundry lots and houses to his mother, his sisters, his brothers separately, and his son. These are given to their respective devisees "as their property forever." He then devised the balance of his real estate to his infant son "forever," believed to be certain lots specified in the will. Held that the wife took under the will one-third of all the real estate of ...
King Vs. Thompson
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
King v. Thompson - 38 U.S. 128 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court King v. Thompson, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 128 128 (1839) King v. Thompson 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 128 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON Syllabus A bill was filed claiming a specific performance of an alleged contract to convey a house and lot in Georgetown for the benefit of the wife of the complainant, the complainant having expended a large sum of money in improving the property in the expectation that it would be conveyed as required by the bill. The court not considering that sufficient evidence of an agreement to convey the property was given, ordered that the property should be sold, and out of the proceeds that the advances made by the complainant should be repaid. The property sold for a sum far less than the amount expended. Held that the balance unpaid after the sale, was not a debt due by the estate of the father of the wife, and could not be claime...
Downes and Company Vs. Church
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Downes & Company v. Church - 38 U.S. 205 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Downes & Company v. Church, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 205 205 (1839) Downes & Company v. Church 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 205 ON CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI Syllabus The plaintiffs in an action on the second set of a foreign bills of exchange which was protested for nonacceptance, with the protests thereto attached, can recover without producing the first of the same set or accounting for its nonproduction. This was an action of assumpsit founded on the second of a foreign bill of exchange by the endorsee against the endorser for nonacceptance. The plaintiffs declared upon the "second" of the set of exchange, which "second of the set" was protested for nonacceptance, and the same, with the protest thereto attached, was read in evidence to the jury. Whereupon a question arose whether the plaintiffs could recover upon the said second of exchange w...
Ex Parte Hoyt
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Ex Parte Hoyt - 38 U.S. 279 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Ex Parte Hoyt, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 279 279 (1839) Ex Parte Hoyt 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 279 PETITION FOR MANDAMUS Syllabus Mandamus. The Supreme Court will not issue a mandamus to the District Judge of the Southern District of New York, in a case in which the district judge decided that the custody of goods, wares, and merchandise, proceeded against after a seizure by the collector of the port of New York, was in the marshal of the district, after process had issued by order of the court against the goods. The mandamus was asked for, after an argument before the Supreme Court to show that the custody of the goods was to continue in the collector of the port. The Court said "This is neither more nor less than an application for an order to reverse the solemn judgment of the district judge, in a matter clearly within the jurisdiction of the court, and to substitute another judgment in its stead." A writ of mandamus is not a proper pro...
Wilcox Vs. Hunt
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Wilcox v. Hunt - 38 U.S. 378 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Wilcox v. Hunt, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 378 378 (1839) Wilcox v. Hunt 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 378 ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA Syllabus In the District Court of Louisiana, the defendant pleaded the plea of reconvention, which is authorized by the Code of Practice of Louisiana. The district court, on the motion of the plaintiffs, ordered the plea to be stricken off. The Code of Practice of Louisiana was adopted in Louisiana by a statute of that state passed after the Act of Congress of 26 May, 1824, regulating the practice of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana, and the practice according to that code had not been adopted as part of the rules of practice of the district court when the plea was stricken off. Held that the plea was properly stricken out. Where a deed of trust was made to secure the payment of certain promissory notes in a...
Moore Vs. Bank of Metropolis
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Moore v. Bank of Metropolis - 38 U.S. 302 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Moore v. Bank of Metropolis, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 302 302 (1839) Moore v. Bank of Metropolis 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 302 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus The defendant in an action in the circuit court, had with others, received the proceeds of a joint and several promissory note discounted for them at the Bank of the Metropolis, and this note was afterwards renewed by their attorney under a power of attorney authorizing him to give a joint note, but he gave a joint and several note, the proceeds of which the attorney received, and appropriated to pay the note already discounted at the Bank. The interest of the sum borrowed was paid out of the money of the parties to the note. Held that although the power of attorney may not have been executed in exact conformity to its terms and may not have authorized the giving of a joint and several no...
Ross Vs. Duval
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1839
Ross v. Duval - 38 U.S. 45 (1839) U.S. Supreme Court Ross v. Duval, 38 U.S. 13 Pet. 45 45 (1839) Ross v. Duval 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 45 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Syllabus A judgment was obtained in the circuit court of the United States for the District of Virginia in December, 1821, and a writ of fieri facias was issued on this judgment in January, 1822, which was not returned, and no other execution was issued until August, 1836, when a capias ad satisfaciendum was issued against the defendant. Held that this execution issued illegally, in consequence of the lapse of time between the rendition of the judgment and the issuing of execution in 1836. The result of the opinion of the Supreme Court in the case of Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheat. 1, delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, was that the execution laws of Kentucky, having passed subsequent to the process acts, did not apply to executions issued by the circu...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »