| Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
| Dean v. Rathbone |
15 Ala. 328, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Orphans' Court of Madison. Before the Hon. C. C. Clay, jr., Judge. |
|
Cases |
|
| Dearing v. Lightfoot |
16 Ala. 28, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Lawrence. Tried before the the Hon. George W. Lane. |
|
Cases |
|
| Dearing v. Watkins |
16 Ala. 20, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Lawrence. Tried before the Hon. Thomas A. Walker. |
|
Cases |
|
| Deloach & Wilcoxson v. Myrick |
6 Ga. 410, Supreme Court of Georgia (February 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] In the trial of a claim, it is not necessary for the plaintiff in execution to produce the judgment upon which his execution is founded, and the execution may be read in evidence without the judgment. [2.] A levy upon real estate is not prima facie evidence of satisfaction, and although unaccounted for does not extingush the judgment. [3.]... |
|
Cases |
|
| Dent v. Smith |
15 Ala. 286, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa. Before the Hon. Thomas A. Walker. |
|
Cases |
|
| Dicken v. Johnson |
7 Ga. 484, Supreme Court of Georgia (November 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] The opinion of a witness (other than a subscribing witness or a physician,) is not competent to prove the insanity of a grantor, unless the facts and circumstances are stated, upon which it is founded. [2.] When a grantor goes into Chancery to avoid his own deed upon the ground of insanity, the burthen is upon him to prove it at the time the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Dixon v. Feild |
10 Ark. 243, Supreme Court of Arkansas (July 01, 1849) |
1849 |
This is an application for a mandamus to the circuit court of Pulaski county to compel that court to set aside an order continuing a certain cause described in the petition, and to proceed with the trial thereof. The circuit court, in the return to the alternative writ, denies that a mandamus will lie inasmuch as there was no refusal to act; but... |
|
Cases |
|
| Dobbin v. Bryan |
5 Tex. 276, Supreme Court of Texas (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
We will first inquire whether the demurrer to the jurisdiction was well taken. If the facts stated in the petition are to be considered as true, it seems to me that the jurisdiction of the District Court can be sustained on two distinct grounds. The first is that the fraudulent combination between the administrator and his confederates, in... |
|
Cases |
|
| Doe v. Biggers |
6 Ga. 188, Supreme Court of Georgia (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] To admit secondary evidence of the contents of a paper, its existence must be proven, and its destruction or loss. [2.] Where the loss of a paper is relied upon, the law does not require positive proof of loss, but proof sufficient to raise a reasonable presumption of loss. [3.] It is the province of the Court to determine whether the loss is... |
|
Cases |
|
| Doggett v. Jordan |
2 Fla. 541, Supreme Court of Florida (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It is erroneous so to instruct or charge a jury, as to leave the whole case to the opinion of the jury, without reference to the testimony. If a charge is so framed, the jury may suppose that they are at liberty to find their verdict upon what they know of the case, irrespective of the evidence before them. The question whether a partnership exists... |
|
Cases |
|
| Dorsey v. Whipps |
8 Gill 457, Court of Appeals of Maryland (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
This appeal is taken from the court in and for Howard district. The suit was instituted by the appellee, and is an action of slander. The plea was not guilty, and in the court below the verdict was obtained by the plaintiff. In the course of the trial, several exceptions were taken by the defendant, and after the verdict, reasons in arrest of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Drennen v. Brown |
10 Ark. 138, Supreme Court of Arkansas (July 01, 1849) |
1849 |
New trials are never granted on the ground that the verdict is contrary to evidence, unless the evidence is clearly insufficient to sustain the verdict. This court will adhere to the rule, heretofore laid down, that the verdict must be not only against the weight of evidence, but so much so as at first blush to shock our sense of justice and right.... |
|
Cases |
|
| Drew v. Ricks |
17 Ala. 25, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the County Court of Greene. |
|
Cases |
|
| Driskell v. Parish |
5 McLean 64, Circuit Court, D Ohio (November 01, 1849) |
1849 |
For reports of former trials, see Cases Nos. 4,089 and 4,087. |
|
Cases |
|
| Duncan v. Webb |
7 Ga. 187, Supreme Court of Georgia (July 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] An entry on a fi. fa. by the Sheriff, in any County in Georgia, is a sufficient compliance with the Act requiring a return within seven years by the proper officer for executing the same. [2.] If any one is injured by the false or fraudulent return of the Sheriff, he is entitled to his remedy. Fi. fa. and claim, in Randolph Superior Court. A... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision is no longer good law for at least one of the points it contains. |
| Dunn v. Choate |
4 Tex. 14, Supreme Court of Texas (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Of the several errors assigned, it does not become necessary, in the view we have taken of the case, to consider particularly but the one regarded as most material; that is, as to the ruling of the court in refusing a new trial. To entitle the plaintiff to recover in this action, it was incumbent on him to prove a property in himself, either... |
|
Cases |
|
| Dye v. Wall |
6 Ga. 584, Supreme Court of Georgia (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The declaration in this case contains a count upon the contract of warranty, contained in the bill of sale, to the admissibility of which in evidence exception was taken, and the plaintiff was put upon his election, whether he would rely upon that count or upon the counts for the fraud and deceit in the sale. He elected to rely upon the latter, to... |
|
Cases |
|
| Edwards v. Bennett |
10 Ired. 361, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It is not stated, upon what ground the petition was dismissed. The objection for the want of parties was met by the assignment of Riggsbee. The objection, that the deed was void, being obtained by fraud and deception, without consideration, (supposing a general allegation of the kind, sufficient to raise an objection,) is not supported; for, the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Eldridge v. Spence |
16 Ala. 682, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Talladega. Tried before the Hon. Thos. A. Walker. |
|
Cases |
|
| Ellis v. Ellis' Adm'r |
15 Ala. 296, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Chancery Court of the 22d District. Before the Hon. W. W. Mason, Chancellor. |
|
Cases |
|
| Erwin v. Lowry |
48 U.S. 172, Supreme Court of the United States (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
THIS case was brought up from the Supreme Court for the Western District of Louisiana, by a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act. In the beginning of the year 1835, Dawson and Nutt were the owners of some land situated in the parish of Carroll, in the State of Louisiana, on the waters of the Walnut Bayou, amounting to... |
|
Cases |
|
| Ex parte Pile |
9 Ark. 336, Supreme Court of Arkansas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
A judgment upon a forfeited delivery bond, on motion, without notice to the defendant, actual or constructive, is utterly void, as repeatedly held by this court. The revival of such void judgment on scire facias, imparts no validity to it, though the defendant appear and plead to the writ. Complainant's bill being verified by affidavit, the facts... |
|
Cases |
|
| Ex parte Reardon |
9 Ark. 450, Supreme Court of Arkansas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The 46th sec, of chap. 67, Digest, giving forfeited delivery bonds the force and effect of judgments, upon which execution may issue, held constitutional. By the stipulations of the bond, the obligors waive the right of trial by jury. Scott, J., remarks upon the power of the courts to set aside such judgments, and the mode of defending against... |
|
Cases |
|
| Field v. Walker |
17 Ala. 80, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Certiorari to the Judge of the County Court of Tuscaloosa. THIS was a proceeding by habeas corpus, sued out at the instance of the defendants in error. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the Court. |
|
Cases |
|
| Fisk v. Proctor |
4 La.Ann. 562, Supreme Court of Louisiana (November 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the Fifth District Court of New Orleans, Buchanan, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| Fleming v. Townsend |
6 Ga. 103, Supreme Court of Georgia (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] Possession retained by the vendor, after an absolute sale of real or personal property, is prima facie evidence of fraud, which may be explained, and after the possession is proven, the burthen of explaining it rests upon those who claim under the sale; and the rule is applicable to voluntary conveyances, and to sales for valuable... |
|
Cases |
|
| Fletcher v. Ashley |
6 Gratt. 332, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (October 01, 1849) |
1849 |
(Absent Cabell, P.) A deed executed by a woman a few days before her marriage, to secure a debt due to her daughter by a former marriage, held to be valid. Mrs. Maria D. Hall was the guardian of her daughter Mary Ann, and as such she had received the sum of 100 dollars. On the 24th of December 1828, she executed a deed, by which, reciting said... |
|
Cases |
|
| Fletcher v. Dysart |
9 B.Mon. 413, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (June 20, 1849) |
1849 |
Non est factum. APPEAL FROM THE LINCOLN CIRCUIT. Case stated. IN 1841, Fletcher, Arnold, Sanders and Stewart, brought five separate actions upon notes purporting to be executed by David B. Proctor, James Dysart, John B. Dysart and James Proctor. In each of these actions, the two last named defendants, John B. Dysart and Jas. Proctor, filed separate... |
|
Cases |
|
| Flournoy v. Mims |
17 Ala. 36, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Macon. Tried before the Hon. John J. Woodward. |
|
Cases |
|
| Ford's Ex'rs v. Lewis |
10 B.Mon. 127, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (January 07, 1849) |
1849 |
WITHOUT going into any detail of the facts of this vexatious and complicated case, we are satisfied from a laborious investigation of the record, that the arrangement between Lewis and Wm. M. Ford, by which the latter got the possession and the title of a large portion of Lewis' property, consisting of one-half of the ferry property, and also of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Forman v. Proctor |
9 B.Mon. 124, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (January 12, 1849) |
1849 |
Mortgage lien. Execution lien. Landlord's lien. Rent. ERROR TO THE MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT. Two cases come up in this record, in which a single decree was rendered; and errors are assigned applicable to both cases. The interest of a party in property which he may perfect by the performance of an executory contract may be the subject of a mortgage or... |
|
Cases |
|
| Foscue v. Eubank |
10 Ired. 424, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
As the objection of the defendant is founded on very nice and technical reasons, the Court would willingly sustain the action, if it could be done without violating the principle, on which detinue rests. Its object is to recover a thing specifically; and therefore the law gives it only against one, who, it sees, had it in his power, when sued, to... |
|
Cases |
|
| Fossett v. Turnage |
28 Tenn. 686, Supreme Court of Tennessee (April 01, 1849) |
1849 |
This is an action of debt for $238.08, brought on forfeited delivery bond. The declaration alleges that the defendants, together with another who is not sued, executed their writing obligatory to John B. Mosely, sheriff of Shelby county, for the use of the plaintiffs, whereby they bound themselves in the sum of $238.08, conditioned that, whereas... |
|
Cases |
|
| Foster v. Brooks |
6 Ga. 287, Supreme Court of Georgia (February 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] It is not competent to prove insanity by proof of the reputation or opinion of the neighborhood. [2.] Held, that this Court will not interfere with the established practice of the Circuit Courts of Georgia, in relation to the alternative form of the verdict in trover. [3.] In actions of trover, where there is conflicting evidence of the value... |
|
Cases |
|
| Foster v. Mitchell |
15 Ala. 571, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the 23d Chancery District. Tried before the Hon. W. W. Mason, Chancellor. |
|
Cases |
|
| Foster v. Pugh |
12 Smedes & M. 416, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It seems that, where real and personal property of a defendant in an execution, are sold under the execution, and the same person purchases both, the fact that the purchaser permits the personal property to remain, after the sale, in the defendant's possession, even if primâ facie fraudulent as to the personal property, is not evidence of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Foster v. Smith |
16 Ala. 192, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Monroe. Tried before the Hon. John Bragg. |
|
Cases |
|
| Fourniquet v. Perkins |
48 U.S. 160, Supreme Court of the United States (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
THIS was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana. In the year 1818, Mary Bynum, the widow of Benjamin Bynum deceased, was living in the parish of Concordia, State of Louisiana, with four children, of whom Harriet, the wife of the appellant, was one. In August, 1818, Mrs. Bynum intermarried with John... |
|
Cases |
|
| Freeman v. Cook |
6 Ired.Eq. 373, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The first enquiry presented by the case is, have the defendants been guilty of a breach of their trust. Justice Story in the 2nd volume of his Equity Jurisprudence, p. 576, sec. 1275, thus sums up the duty of a trustee. He is to defend the title to the property at law; should any suit be brought concerning it, to give notice to his cestui que... |
|
Cases |
|
| Frierson v. Beall |
7 Ga. 438, Supreme Court of Georgia (September 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] To the validity of a will of personal property, it is only necessary that it be made by, or according to, the directions of the deceased, and be in writing. It is not necessary that a will of personal property be witnessed, or written or signed by the testator; if drawn up according to his directions or approved by him, it may operate as a... |
|
Cases |
|
| Frierson v. Irwin |
4 La.Ann. 277, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the Second District Court of New Orleans, McHenry, J. presiding. |
|
Cases |
|
| Fryerson v. Fryerson |
34 S.C.L. 459, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Such a thing as a grant of a personal estate to the wife, by the husband, is unknown at law. At law, the wife's legal existence is merged in that of the husband, and she can have no separate legal estate. |
|
Cases |
|
| Fulmer v. Harmon |
34 S.C.L. 576, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
In an action for malicious prosecution, the fact that the grand jury had returned no bill against the plaintiff, is not prima facie sufficient evidence of the want of probable cause for the prosecution which had been brought against him by the defendant, so as to save the plaintiff from a non-suit. The case of Slider v. Myers, (MSS. Columbia,... |
|
Cases |
|
| Fultz v. Fox |
9 B.Mon. 499, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (September 18, 1849) |
1849 |
Husband and Wife. Debts of Femes Covert. ERROR TO THE JEFFERSON CIRCUIT. The case stated. IN 1841, Ildagertha S., and Mary E. Welsh, two unmarried females, executed a joint and several note to Jacob Fox, for the sum of fifty dollars, payable three months after date. In 1843, Ildagertha was married to M. J. Fultz. In February, 1846, an act was... |
|
Cases |
|
| Gales v. Christy |
4 La.Ann. 293, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the Fifth District Court of New Orleans, Buchanan, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| Gamard v. Hart |
4 La.Ann. 503, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the District Court of Rapides, Cushman, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| Garland v. Hull |
13 Smedes & M. 76, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The chancery court has no jurisdiction of a bill filed by one person against another, to recover the amount of various open accounts held by the complainant against the defendant; some of which were contracted by the defendant with other persons than the complainant, and had been purchased by the complainant, and some contracted with the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Garland v. Milling |
6 Ga. 310, Supreme Court of Georgia (February 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] When the Court below fairly submits the facts in the case, to the consideration of the Jury, and there is no error in law in the charge of the Court, this Court will not disturb the verdict of the Jury. [2.] The Statute of Limitations does not commence to run against the estate of a deceased testator, until probate of the will and... |
|
Cases |
|
| Gasque v. Moody |
12 Smedes & M. 153, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It is competent for the probate court to revoke a grant of letters of administration, when sufficiently advised that they have been improperly granted. After a grant of letters, and the settlement of an estate, another grant of letters on the same estate, unless it be a grant of letters de bonis non, now in cases provided for by law, is a nullity,... |
|
Cases |
|
| Gaulden v. McPhaul |
4 La.Ann. 79, Supreme Court of Louisiana (February 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the District Court of Point Coupée, Farrar, J. |
|
Cases |
|