Us Supreme Court Court January 1849 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.
Luther Vs. Borden
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Luther v. Borden - 48 U.S. 1 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 7 How. 1 1 (1849) Luther v. Borden * 48 U.S. (7 How.) 1 Syllabus At the period of the American Revolution, Rhode Island did not, like the other States, adopt a new constitution, but continued the form of government established by the Charter of Charles the Second, making only such alterations, by acts of the Legislature, as were necessary to adapt it to their condition and rights as an independent State. But no mode of proceeding was pointed out by which amendments might be made. In 1841, a portion of the people held meetings and formed associations which resulted in the election of a convention to form a new constitution to be submitted to the people for their adoption or rejection. This convention framed a constitution, directed a vote to be taken upon it, declared afterwards that it had been adopted and ratified by a majority of the people of the State, and was the paramount law and constitut...
United States Vs. Chicago
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
United States v. Chicago - 48 U.S. 185 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Chicago, 48 U.S. 7 How. 185 185 (1849) United States v. Chicago 48 U.S. (7 How.) 185 ON CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION IN OPINION FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Syllabus Although the motion under argument in the circuit court was addressed to its discretion, yet if the questions which arose and upon which the judges differed involved the right of the matter, this Court will entertain those questions. So also where the questions are several in number, and so material as to decide the whole case, this Court will not dismiss them, provided they appear to have arisen at one time, at one stage of the cause, and to have involved little beyond one point. The corporate powers of the City of Chicago have no right to open streets through property belonging to the United States, adjacent to the city, although the ground had been laid out in lots and streets by the govern...
Wagner Vs. Baird
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Wagner v. Baird - 48 U.S. 234 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Wagner v. Baird, 48 U.S. 7 How. 234 234 (1849) Wagner v. Baird 48 U.S. (7 How.) 234 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OHIO Syllabus There is a defense peculiar to courts of equity founded on lapse of time and the staleness of the claim, where no statute of limitations directly governs the case. In such cases, the court often acts upon its own inherent doctrine of discouraging, for the peace of society, antiquated demands by refusing to interfere where there has been gross laches in prosecuting rights or long acquiescence in the assertion of adverse rights. The rule upon this subject, originally laid down by Lord Camden in Smith v. Clay, 3 Brown's Chancery Reports 640, note, and adopted by this Court in 42 U. S. 1 How. 189, again asserted. Long acquiescence and laches by parties out of possession are productive of much hardship and injustice to others, and cannot be excused but by...
Crawford Vs. Branch Bank of Alabama
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Crawford v. Branch Bank of Alabama - 48 U.S. 279 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Crawford v. Branch Bank of Alabama, 48 U.S. 7 How. 279 279 (1849) Crawford v. Branch Bank of Alabama 48 U.S. (7 How.) 279 ERROR TO SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA Syllabus A statute of the State of Alabama, directing that promissory notes given to the cashier of a bank may be sued and collected in the name of the bank is a law which affects the remedy only, and, although passed after the note was executed, does not impair the obligation of the contract. Besides, the record does not show that the question of the consistency of the statute with the Constitution of the United States was raised in the state court, and therefore a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act must be dismissed on motion. In May, 1841, the following promissory note was executed: "$3,817.50" "Two hundred and fifteen days after date, we jointly and severally promise to pay to B. Gayle, cashier, or order,...
Kennedy's Executors Vs. Hunt's Lessee
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Kennedy's Executors v. Hunt's Lessee - 48 U.S. 586 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Kennedy's Executors v. Hunt's Lessee, 48 U.S. 7 How. 586 586 (1849) Kennedy's Executors v. Hunt's Lessee 48 U.S. (7 How.) 586 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA Syllabus Forbes and Company obtained a grant of land in 1807 from Morales, Intendant General under the Spanish government, which land was adjacent to Mobile, in West Florida. This grant purported to be, in part, the confirmation of a concession granted in 1796 and surveyed in 1802. The survey terminated at high water mark upon the river. The grant of 1807 included the land between the then bank of the river and the high water mark of 1802. This grant of 1807 was excepted from the operation of the act of Congress passed on 26 March, 1804, which annulled all Spanish grants made after 1 October, 1800, and was recognized as a valid grant by the Act of 3 March, 1819. An Act of March 2, 1829, confirmed an incomplete Spanish conces...
Sadler Vs. Hoover
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Sadler v. Hoover - 48 U.S. 646 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Sadler v. Hoover, 48 U.S. 7 How. 646 646 (1849) Sadler v. Hoover 48 U.S. (7 How.) 646 ON CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI Syllabus Where an appeal from a circuit court, sitting in chancery, is brought up to this Court upon a certificate of division in opinion, and the certificate states that the court was not able to agree in opinion, one of the judges being of opinion that a decree should be rendered for the complainants and the other that a decree should be rendered for the defendants, this was not such a distinct statement of the point or points upon which the judges differed as would give this Court jurisdiction. The appeal must therefore be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The following is the statement of facts agreed upon in the court below by the counsel for the respective parties and sent up with the record. "WM. SADLER and FRANCIS...
Missouri Vs. Iowa
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Missouri v. Iowa - 48 U.S. 660 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Missouri v. Iowa, 48 U.S. 7 How. 660 660 (1849) Missouri v. Iowa 48 U.S. (7 How.) 660 ORIGINAL Syllabus The western and northern boundary lines of the State of Missouri, as described in the first article of the constitution of that state, were as follows: from a point in the middle of the Kansas River, where the same empties into the Missouri River, running due north along a meridian line to the intersection of the parallel of latitude which passes through the rapids of the River Des Moines, making said line correspond with the Indian boundary line; thence east from the point of intersection last aforesaid along the said parallel to the middle of the channel of the main fork of the said River Des Moines, thence &c.; The Constitution of the State of Missouri was adopted in 1820. But in 1816, an Indian boundary line had been run by the authority of the United States, which in its north course did not terminate at its i...
Cutler Vs. Rae
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Cutler v. Rae - 48 U.S. 729 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Cutler v. Rae, 48 U.S. 7 How. 729 729 (1849) Cutler v. Rae 48 U.S. (7 How.) 729 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus Where a vessel was run on shore by the captain in order to save the lives of those on board and for the preservation of the cargo, by which act the vessel was totally lost but the cargo saved and delivered to the consignee, a libel in personam, filed by the owner of the vessel against the consignee of the cargo (and the result would be the same if filed against the owner of the cargo) for a contribution by way of general average, cannot be sustained in the admiralty courts of the United states. Those courts have jurisdiction wherever the vessel or cargo is subject to an absolute lien, created by the maritime law; and will follow property subject to such a lien into the hands of assignees. The lien, in such cases, does not depend upon possession. But...
Lawrence Vs. Allen
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Lawrence v. Allen - 48 U.S. 785 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Lawrence v. Allen, 48 U.S. 7 How. 785 785 (1849) Lawrence v. Allen 48 U.S. (7 How.) 785 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus By the fifth section of the Tariff Act passed on 30 August, 1842, 5 Stat. 555, a duty of thirty percent is imposed on "India rubber oil cloth, webbing, shoes, braces or suspenders, or any other fabrics or manufactured articles composed wholly or in part of India rubber." In the ninth section, among other articles declared to be exempt from duty is "India rubber in bottles or sheets, or otherwise unmanufactured." By these sections, the duty of thirty percent is payable upon shoes made of India rubber in Brazil, although they are made by the same process as bottles or sheets, provided they come to this country in a condition to be worn without further material labor on them here, and were actually worn in this form, and provided they were c...
Massingill Vs. Downs
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: 1849
Massingill v. Downs - 48 U.S. 760 (1849) U.S. Supreme Court Massingill v. Downs, 48 U.S. 7 How. 760 760 (1849) Massingill v. Downs 48 U.S. (7 How.) 760 ON CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION IN OPINION BETWEEN THE JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI Syllabus Where a Judgment was obtained in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Mississippi in 1839, and in 1841 the State of Mississippi passed a law requiring judgments to be recorded in a particular way in order to make them a lien upon property, this statute did not abrogate the lien which had been acquired under the judgment of 1839, although the latter had not been recorded in the manner required by the statute. The facts are fully set forth in the opinion of the Court, as delivered by MR. JUSTICE McLEAN, to which the reader is referred. Page 48 U. S. 764 MR. JUSTICE McLEAN delivered the opinion of the Court. This action was brought in the Southern District of...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »