| Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
| Lucas v. Duffield |
6 Gratt. 456, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (October 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The judgment is affirmed. |
|
Cases |
|
| Luther v. Borden |
48 U.S. 1, Supreme Court of the United States (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
THESE two cases came up from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Rhode Island, the former by a writ of error, and the latter by a certificate of division in opinion. As the allegations, evidence, and arguments were the same in both, it is necessary to state those only of the first. They were argued at the preceding term of... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
| Lynch v. Baxter |
4 Tex. 431, Supreme Court of Texas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
An administrator's sale is a judicial sale and operates in rem. In such cases it is a general rule that caveat emptor applies, and the purchaser takes his purchase without warranty, express or implied; and if the administrator gives the purchaser a bond for a warranty title, it is not in his capacity as administrator. (Note 93.) Quere whether the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Lynn's Adm'r v. Sisk |
9 B.Mon. 135, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (January 16, 1849) |
1849 |
Executions. Revivor. Sci. fa. Sheriffs. ERROR TO THE HOPKINS CIRCUIT. The case stated. THIS was an action on the case against Lynn, for making an excessive levy and sale on an execution in his hands, and for converting the proceeds of the sale to his own use. The defendant pleaded not guilty and died before trial. A scire facias was thereupon... |
|
Cases |
|
| Lyon v. Goree |
15 Ala. 360, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Perry. Before the Hon. George Goldthwaite. |
|
Cases |
|
| Machen v. Machen |
15 Ala. 373, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Cherokee. Before the Hon. Thomas A. Walker. |
|
Cases |
|
| Mahorner v. Harrison |
13 Smedes & M. 53, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The facts of this case examined by the court, and the conclusion reached that part of the lands in controversy in the cause, were purchased by the defendant for the testator, as whose devisee the complainant claimed, and with the testator's money; and that a resulting trust was created thereby in favor of the testator, and through him of his... |
|
Cases |
|
| Maner v. Washington |
22 S.C.Eq. 171, Court of Appeals of Equity of South Carolina (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Complainant bought a tract of land, and, under the advice of counsel, took a title, (with warranty,) which he believed to be good, and paid the purchase money. After ten years possession, being advised by other counsel that the title would be defeasible by the happening of a future contingency, he filed a bill for confirmation of the title, &c. or... |
|
Cases |
|
| Mann v. Manning |
12 Smedes & M. 615, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The high court of errors and appeals will not grant a new trial, unless the preponderance of the testimony be greatly against the finding of the jury; especially where there was conflicting testimony, and no instructions called for on either side. Where the defence to an action on a bill single was the presumption of payment from lapse of time and... |
|
Cases |
|
| Marshall v. Gantt |
15 Ala. 682, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Dallas. Before the Hon. Nathan Cook. |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision is no longer good law for at least one of the points it contains. |
| Marshall v. Wood |
16 Ala. 806, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Macon. Tried before the Hon. Nathan Cook. |
|
Cases |
|
| Martin v. Broach |
6 Ga. 21, Supreme Court of Georgia (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] The 17th section of the 1st art. of the State Constitution, inhibiting the passage of any law, by the Legislature, containing any matter different from what is expressed in the title, does not require that the title should set forth a synopsis of the entire Act. [2.] Where the title specifies some of the objects for which the Statute was... |
|
Cases |
|
| Martin v. Terrell |
12 Smedes & M. 571, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
By the laws of this state, a note given for a bet lost upon a horse-race, is absolutely void; and so also is a judgment at law upon such a note, void by the same statute; and it will be declared so, upon the application of the maker, by a court of equity. And if the assignee for value paid to the payee, receive from the maker a new note, in lieu of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Massingill v. Downs |
48 U.S. 760, Supreme Court of the United States (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
THIS case came up from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi, upon a certificate of division in opiinion between the judges thereof. The facts are fully set forth in the opinion of the court, as delivered by Mr. Justice McLean, to which the reader is referred. Mr. Sargent and Mr. Bell made the following... |
|
Cases |
|
| May v. May |
15 Ala. 177, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Orphans' Court of Greene. Before the Hon. Sydenham Moore, Judge. |
|
Cases |
|
| Mayor and Council of Columbus v. Howard |
6 Ga. 213, Supreme Court of Georgia (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] A count in trover in the usual form is not demurrable; the Statute of 1847, prescribing a special form of declaration for the recovery of personal property being permissive only, and not compulsory. [2.] Offers of compromise, with a view to settle or prevent litigation, are inadmissible; but an independent acknowledgement of a fact may be... |
|
Cases |
|
| Mayor of Columbus v. Goetchius |
7 Ga. 139, Supreme Court of Georgia (July 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] The citizens of an incorporated City, who are liable to be taxed for the payment of the verdict, are incompetent to sit as special jurors on the trial of a cause in which the City Council are defendants. [2.] Where the Court charges the law correctly to the Jury, although prefaced by some preliminary remarks, not affecting the merits of the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Mayrant v. Guignard |
22 S.C.Eq. 112, Court of Appeals of Equity of South Carolina (November 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The waiver by a trustee of the rights of his cestui que trust, by a contract executory in its character, and without a valuable consideration, and in behalf of a party who was aware of the equities of the cestui que trust, will not be enforced to the prejudice of the trust estate. Husband and wife cannot be witnesses for or against each other. And... |
|
Cases |
|
| McAuley v. His Creditors |
4 La.Ann. 52, Supreme Court of Louisiana (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the District Court of the First District, Buchanan, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| McCalop v. Hereford |
4 La.Ann. 185, Supreme Court of Louisiana (March 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the District Court of East Baton Rouge, Burk, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| McColman v. Wilkes |
34 S.C.L. 465, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The plaintiff had a large grant which covered land previously granted to one Wade, and much more; within the Wade grant, the plaintiff, by his agents, had actual occupancy of part, with a claim to the whole within his own grant, but not long enough to give title by possession; he knew of the Wade grant, and had possession of the paper, but no right... |
|
Cases |
|
| McCracken v. Ansley |
35 S.C.L. 1, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
If a defendant resist an arrest, then there must be some corporal touching of his body, to make the arrest complete. But if the defendant submit, there is no necessity to touch his body. The rule with regard to a written contract is, that the obligatory part of it, what the party undertook to do or perform, shall not be varied by parol... |
|
Cases |
|
| McDaniel v. Whitman |
16 Ala. 343, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Orphans' Court of Perry. |
|
Cases |
|
| McGaffey v. State |
4 Tex. 156, Supreme Court of Texas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It is not necessary in an indictment to use the precise words of the statute. Hence an indictment under the eighth section of the act of February 5, 1840, to suppress gaming, was held sufficient, although the term employed by the act was house and the term employed by the indictment was store-room. In an... |
|
Cases |
|
| McGill v. McGill |
4 La.Ann. 262, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the District Court of Tensas, Selby, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| McGowan v. James |
12 Smedes & M. 445, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The chancery court has power under the statute (Hutch. Code, 769) to set aside a pro confesso, upon good cause shown and payment of costs, and should do so when a proper case occurs; and upon its refusal it will be ordered, on appeal from the decree of the chancellor, by this court. A bill was filed to foreclose a mortgage in the superior court of... |
|
Cases |
|
| McGuire v. Miller |
15 Ala. 394, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa. Before the Hon. T. A. Walker. |
|
Cases |
|
| McGuire v. Ramsey |
9 Ark. 518, Supreme Court of Arkansas (July 01, 1849) |
1849 |
To create a resulting trust, there must be an original agreement creating the trust at the time of the purchase, or when the contract for the purchase takes effect: and no resulting trust can arise in contradiction to the terms of the deed. Resulting trusts, or trusts created by operation of law, are expressly excluded from the operation of our... |
|
Cases |
|
| McIntosh v. Alexander |
16 Ala. 87, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Chancery Court of Montgomery. Before the Hon. Jos. W. Lesesne, Chancellor. |
|
Cases |
|
| McIntyre v. Chappell |
4 Tex. 187, Supreme Court of Texas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Circumstances under which the heir may maintain an action for the personal property of the ancestor, without claiming through administration. This case distinguished from the case of Moore against Morse. (2 Tex. R., 400.) (Note 39.) Where the place of domicile of both the parties is the same as that of the celebration of the marriage, the laws of... |
|
Cases |
|
| McIntyre v. Whitfield |
13 Smedes & M. 88, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (November 01, 1849) |
1849 |
A stipulation in a mortgage, that the mortgagee may, on the failure of the mortgagor to pay the notes secured by the mortgage, take possession of the mortgaged property, and receive the rents and profits thereof, until the mortgage debt shall be paid, may be enforced by the mortgagee, who may take possession of the property accordingly upon such... |
|
Cases |
|
| McKay v. Simpson |
6 Ired.Eq. 452, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It was urged in the argument for the plaintiff, that stock in a Bank or manufactornig company could not always be bought in the market, like cotton, corn, or government stock in England, and therefore Equity should decree a specific performance of contracts to convey such stock, because a recovery of the value will not, as a matter of course,... |
|
Cases |
|
| McKay v. State |
12 Mo. 492, Supreme Court of Missouri (October 01, 1849) |
1849 |
1st. The court below erred in setting aside the order of continuance, and setting the case for trial on the 18th December. There are only two regular terms of the court in Jefferson county--4th Mondays of May and November. Rev. Stat. p. 325, ยง 25. After the court, on the 28th November, ordered a general continuance to the next term, the cause stood... |
|
Cases |
|
| McKenzie v. Allen |
34 S.C.L. 546, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It is a well settled rule that, as evidence is to be confined to the point in issue, the character of either party cannot be inquired into, in a civil suit, unless it is put in issue by the nature of the proceeding itself. In an action of assault and battery, the defendant cannot give in evidence the bad character of the plaintiff, by way of... |
|
Cases |
|
| McLain v. Taylor |
9 Ark. 358, Supreme Court of Arkansas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
A judgment on a forfeited delivery bond, taken on motion, without notice to defendants, actual or constructive, is no bar to an action of debt on the same bond. The sheriff may justify under process issued on such judgment, the court having jurisdiction of the subject matter, but not so with the plaintiff therein. A demurrer having been sustained... |
|
Cases |
|
| McLaughlin v. Bank of Potomac |
48 U.S. 220, 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 Columbia and County of Alexandria, sitting as a court of chancery. The bill was filed in the Circuit Court by the President, Directors, and Company of the Bank of Potomac, Elijah Dallett and Elijah Dallett, Jr., trading under the firm of Elijah Dallett & Co., William... |
|
Cases |
|
| McNeeley v. Hart |
10 Ired. 63, Supreme Court of North Carolina (August 01, 1849) |
1849 |
We concur in the opinion of the Judge below, for the reasons given by him. Irwin, the cropper, had a mere executory contract, a chose in action, which could not be assigned. State v. Jones, 2 Dev. & Bat. 544. It was very ingeniously argued for the plaintiff, that, yielding the question as to the corn, he was entitled to recover for the oats, upon... |
|
Cases |
|
| McPherson v. Walters |
16 Ala. 714, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Talladega. Tried before the Hon. Nathan Cook. |
|
Cases |
|
| McRaeny v. Johnson |
2 Fla. 520, Supreme Court of Florida (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The trustee of a married woman is the proper person to bring an action at law for asserting or defending the legal title, and every action founded on such title must be brought in his name. The fact that the property, for an injury to which the action is brought, was in the actual possession of the feme at the time of the injury, does not change or... |
|
Cases |
|
| Menard v. Shaw |
5 Tex. 334, Supreme Court of Texas (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
It seems to me very clear that such certificates were not subject to be levied on and sold at common law; that, like any other evidence of debt or an interest secured, they were not supposed to possess any intrinsic value, and could not have been the subject of larceny. It has been so considered in most of the States where the common law forms the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Meredith v. Anders |
9 Ired. 329, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The only question presented to this Court is, as to the devise of the two hundred acres. The construction put upon it by the presiding Judge in the Court below was correct. The land is, by the will of Elizabeth Locke, given to the lessor of the plaintiff, and the cause assigned, to-wit, her love and affection for him, and to enable him to take care... |
|
Cases |
|
| Merle v. Andrews |
4 Tex. 200, Supreme Court of Texas (December 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Where the plaintiff sued the representatives of the defendant, who had been his agent, for a settlement of accounts, and prayed that they might be ordered to deliver over all of said claims and convey said lands, and to make such further account of the said business as justice may require, &c., there was a decree establishing the right of the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Merritt v. Scott |
6 Ga. 563, Supreme Court of Georgia (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
[1.] Marriage articles will be executed in favor of all persons coming within the scope of the marriage consideration, and at their instance, but not at the instance of mere volunteers. [2.] Those having natural claims upon the parties, such as the wife and offspring, and those claiming under or through them, alone come within the scope of the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Merselis v. Merselis |
7 N.J. Eq. 557, Court of Chancery of New Jersey (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
That part of the prayer of the bill which is founded on an alleged agreement by the executors to become jointly responsible to the complainant for a certain amount, including several bonds and mortgages and other securities not yet collected, and which prays that the executors jointly may be decreed to pay to the complainant that certain amount,... |
|
Cases |
|
| Middleton v. Maull |
16 Ala. 479, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Orphans' Court of Lowndes. |
|
Cases |
|
| Miller v. Hemphill |
9 Ark. 488, Supreme Court of Arkansas (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
An order re-instating a cause on the docket which had been dismissed at the preceding term for want of prosecution, is coram non judice. When a cause has been called and submitted to the court, no act remains to be done by the party, no duty is incumbent on him but to hear and perform the decree; and the court cannot dismiss the cause for want of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Miller v. Hoyle |
6 Ired.Eq. 269, Supreme Court of North Carolina (August 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Where a bond, which is secured by a deed of trust, is assigned, the assignee shall have the benefit of such security. Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Catawba County, at the Spring Term 1848. The plaintiff and Philip H. Bennick were partners in a small retail store, under the management of Bennick. In 1842, the concern became very much... |
|
Cases |
|
| Miller v. Miller |
4 La.Ann. 354, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Appeal from the Fifth District Court of New Orleans, Buchanan, J. |
|
Cases |
|
| Mims v. Sturdevant |
16 Ala. 154, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
Error to the Circuit Court of Monroe. Tried before the Hon. John Bragg. |
|
Cases |
|
| Mizell v. Herbert |
12 Smedes & M. 547, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1849) |
1849 |
The defendant in an attachment suit at law, is a competent witness in behalf of a complainant in a bill in chancery, who claims the property attached, as belonging to him, and not to the defendant in the attachment; notwithstanding that the latter is charged with having made a fraudulent sale of the attached property, to such complainant, on which... |
|
Cases |
|