Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
Davis v. Young |
20 Ala. 151, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Pickens. Tried before the Hon. William R. Smith. |
|
Cases |
|
De Lane v. Moore |
55 U.S. 253, Supreme Court of the United States (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
THIS was an appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Middle District of Alabama. The case is fully stated in the opinion of the court. The counsel for the appellants, after stating the case, proceeded: It appears, from the record, that the defendants, objected to the reading of the papers of the marriage settlement, because the... |
|
Cases |
|
Dejarnett v. Haynes |
1 Cushm. 600, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
It will be sufficient for a party in an action of trespass, in order to sustain his action, to show that he has an actual exclusive possession of the land upon which the alleged trespass was committed; if he have not such possession, he may maintain his action by showing title; and it may then be laid down as a rule, almost without exception, that... |
|
Cases |
|
Delamour v. Roger |
7 La.Ann. 152, Supreme Court of Louisiana (March 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the Third District Court of New Orleans, Kennedy, J. |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Demoruelle v. Sugg |
7 La.Ann. 42, Supreme Court of Louisiana (February 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the District Court of Iberville, Burk, J. |
|
Cases |
|
Denson v. Autrey's Ex'r |
21 Ala. 205, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Court of Probate of Monroe. |
|
Cases |
|
Dent v. Portwood |
21 Ala. 588, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Fayette. Tried before the Hon. WM. R. SMITH. |
|
Cases |
|
Dickinson v. Hoomes' Adm'r |
8 Gratt. 353, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (February 02, 1852) |
1852 |
(Absent Cabell, P.) There is a devise to J, with a limitation over upon his dying without issue at his death, to his brother R if he should survive him, or his representatives, and R dies in the lifetime of J. J sells and conveys the land to A; and R. though he does not convey the land, is a party to the deed, and J and R. covenant as follows: That... |
|
Cases |
|
Dickson v. Bachelder |
21 Ala. 699, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Chambers. Tried before the Hon. GEORGE GOLDTHWAITE. |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Dilliard v. Connoway |
3 Cushm. 230, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (October 01, 1852) |
1852 |
D. made his last will and testament, by which he bequeathed his entire estate, both real and personal, to his wife during her natural life, provided she remained single; but in the event of her marriage, his (D.'s) will declared that the real estate should be divided equally between his wife and his brother, J. D. After the death of D., his wife... |
|
Cases |
|
Dotterer v. Bennett |
5 Rich. 295, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
On quantum meruit for so much as plaintiff reasonably deserved to have for a steam engine which he had agreed in writing, for a certain price, to make and attach to defendant's mill, without stipulation as to the time of payment- held, that the jury could not give the plaintiff interest, eo nomine, on the amount of their verdict from the time the... |
|
Cases |
|
Downey v. Hicks |
55 U.S. 240, Supreme Court of the United States (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Mr. Chief Justice Taney did not sit in this cause. THIS case was brought up, by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi. There were three bills of exceptions taken upon the trial in the Circuit Court, which extended over more than one hundred pages of the printed record. The last one... |
|
Cases |
|
Duke v. Fulmer |
5 Rich.Eq. 121, Court of Appeals of Equity of South Carolina (November 01, 1852) |
1852 |
One with whom plaintiff's wife lived in concubinage, received considerable sums of money belonging to the wife, and purchased property in his own name: Held, that plaintiff's claim to the money or the property was barred by the statute of limitationshis bill having been filed more than eight years after the payment of the money. A... |
|
Cases |
|
Ennis v. Smith |
55 U.S. 400, Supreme Court of the United States (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Origin of the fund in controversy. Mr. Jefferson's letter concerning it. General Kosciusko made four wills. One in the United States, in 1798; another in Paris, in 1806; the third and fourth were made at Soleure, in Switzerland, whilst he was sojourning there in 1816 and 1817. The first and second wills were revoked by the third, and he died... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Evans v. Birge |
11 Ga. 265, Supreme Court of Georgia (February 01, 1852) |
1852 |
[1.] The question made for our consideration in this case is single, but rather difficult to come at. The plaintiff below had given in evidence certain deeds for the land in question, known as the Fay Place, amounting to some seven hundred acres, and composed of a number of fractional lots on the east branch of the Ocmulgee. The defendant, it... |
|
Cases |
|
Ewing v. Blount |
20 Ala. 694, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. L. Gibbons. |
|
Cases |
|
Ewing v. Sanford |
21 Ala. 157, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. LYMAN GIBBONS. |
|
Cases |
|
Ex parte Geddes |
4 Rich.Eq. 301, Court of Appeals of Equity of South Carolina (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
On a sale of land, for partition, in which the wife has a share, the husband may become the purchaser, and thereby become invested, in his own right, with the title of all the co-tenants, including his wife. At a sale of land, by the master, for partition, of which wife owned one moiety, husband became purchaser: he paid the share of the proceeds... |
|
Cases |
|
Fabre v. Hepp |
7 La.Ann. 5, Supreme Court of Louisiana (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the Third District Court of New Orleans, Kennedy, J. |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Ferebee v. Gordon |
13 Ired. 350, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The charge of his Honor was entirely correct. When an article of personal property is sold with all faults, the doctrine of caveat emptor certainly applies. The very object of introducing such a stipulation into the contract is to put the buyer upon his guard, and throw upon him the burthen of examining the article, and guarding himself against all... |
|
Cases |
|
Field v. President and Directors of Ins. Co. of North America |
3 Md. 244, Court of Appeals of Maryland (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
This is an action of covenant, instituted to recover the amount of damage done to certain goods on board the schooner Emory, during a voyage from Baltimore to Ware river, Virginia. The execution of the policy and property in the goods were proven, and that on reaching Ware river and unloading the vessel, certain boxes of goods were saturated with... |
|
Cases |
|
Flora v. Wilson |
13 Ired. 344, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The Court hitherto decided on this will, that Bright's posthumous child took the premises under the description of Polly's heirs by consanguinity, as between him and his mother's brothers and sisters. Watkins v. Flora, 8 Ired. 374. It now appears, that she had another child by her second marriage, who is the lessor of the plaintiff, and is stated... |
|
Cases |
|
Fontenet v. Debaillon |
8 La.Ann. 509, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the District Court, Parish of St. Landry, Overton, J. |
|
Cases |
|
Ford v. Ford |
31 Tenn. 431, Supreme Court of Tennessee (April 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The plaintiff brings his bill, as next of kin to Edward M. Ford, deceased, to recover an interest in a part of his estate not disposed of, as it is asserted, by the will of the deceased. The case was heard upon demurrer, and the bill dismissed; and thereupon the plaintiff has appealed to this court. It appears that on the 20th August, 1846, the... |
|
Cases |
|
Foy v. Foy |
3 Cushm. 207, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (October 01, 1852) |
1852 |
A bill of review can only be maintained for errors apparent on the face of the pleadings and decree, or for new matter discovered since the date of the decree, which the party could not make use of on the trial, or on a petition for a rehearing. A petition for rehearing cannot be filed after the enrolment of the decree, in England; but by a rule of... |
|
Cases |
|
Francois v. State |
20 Ala. 83, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. Alex. McKinstry. |
|
Cases |
|
Franks v. Wanzer |
3 Cushm. 121, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (October 01, 1852) |
1852 |
An application for a continuance of a cause is addressed to the sound discretion of the court in which it is pending, and the exercise of that discretion is not the subject of revision by an appellate court. But a case might arise which would justify a departure from that rule, where flagrant and manifest injustice has been done by an ill-directed... |
|
Cases |
|
Frierson v. Frierson |
21 Ala. 549, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Tuskaloosa. Tried before the Hon. GEO. D. SHORTRIDGE. |
|
Cases |
|
Fulford v. Hancock |
Busb.Eq. 55, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The only difficulty between the parties arises from that clause of the will which gives the remainder of the furniture and all property to be divided between the two daughters and son, the son to have half a part, and the two daughters the remainder. The counsel for the plaintiffs contends that the obvious meaning is to give the son one half... |
|
Cases |
|
Gale v. Matta |
7 La.Ann. 140, Supreme Court of Louisiana (March 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the District Court of the parish of East Baton Rouge, Burk, J. |
|
Cases |
|
Ganaway v. City of Mobile |
21 Ala. 577, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. L. GIBBONS. |
|
Cases |
|
Gandy v. Taintor |
7 La.Ann. 540, Supreme Court of Louisiana (October 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the District Court of the Parish of Caddo, Bullard, J. |
|
Cases |
|
Garcia v. Garcia |
7 La.Ann. 525, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the District Court of the parish of St. Charles, Duffel, J. |
|
Cases |
|
Gardner v. Neal |
9 Gratt. 85, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (July 26, 1852) |
1852 |
(Absent Lee, J.) A sheriff is entitled to commissions on a ca. sa. executed on the defendant, who, after taking the benefit of the prison bounds, pays the amount of the execution to the plaintiff, by whom he is thereupon discharged from custody before the return day of the execution. This was an action of covenant instituted in the Circuit court of... |
|
Cases |
|
Garner v. Garner |
Busb.Eq. 1, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Where a husband executed a deed, intending thereby to secure certain property to his wife and her children by him--he having theretofore provided for his other children by a prior marriage; and he afterwards, and until his death, recognized said deed as passing the property, as he intended, though the same (being made directly to the wife) was... |
|
Cases |
|
Gerald v. Miller |
21 Ala. 433, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Chancery Court of Monroe. Tried before the Hon. J. W. LESESNE. |
|
Cases |
|
Geyer v. Branch Bank at Mobile |
21 Ala. 414, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. JOHN BRAGG. |
|
Cases |
|
Gilbert v. Hardwick |
11 Ga. 599, Supreme Court of Georgia (July 01, 1852) |
1852 |
[1.] The lying over of this cause on the docket for so many terms after the suggestion of Hardwick's removal, without any action therein, did not amount to a discontinuance. Up to the time when the order was taken, to make the administrator de bonis non, with the will annexed, a party, there had been no motion to speed the cause. It was continued,... |
|
Cases |
|
Gingles v. Caldwell |
21 Ala. 444, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Lowndes. Tried before the Hon. E. PICKENS. |
|
Cases |
|
Goesele v. Bimeler |
55 U.S. 589, Supreme Court of the United States (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
THIS was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Ohio, sitting as a Court of Equity. The bill was filed by John G. Goesele and six other persons, as heirs at law of Johannes Goesele, deceased, against Bimeler and twenty-four other persons, members of the Society of Separatists. The facts of the case are stated in... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Goodrum v. Goodrum |
8 Ired.Eq. 313, Supreme Court of North Carolina (August 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The words sole and separate use are those most appropriate, to create a separate estate in a married woman, independent of her husband. Indeed each of those terms, sole, separate, has been held sufficient for that purpose, and especially when coupled with that of disposition by the wife. The... |
|
Cases |
|
Govan v. Binford |
3 Cushm. 151, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (October 01, 1852) |
1852 |
It is the settled doctrine, that if a creditor, without the consent of the surety, enters into a contract with the principal, upon a sufficient consideration, to give him an extension of time for a definite period, or enters into any contract with the principal, which, in its consequences, may have the effect to give such an extension of time, the... |
|
Cases |
|
Graham v. Newman |
21 Ala. 497, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Montgomery. Tried before the Hon. GEORGE GOLDTHWAITE. |
|
Cases |
|
Graham v. Swigert |
12 B.Mon. 522, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (January 17, 1852) |
1852 |
Supersedeas Bonds. Proceedings in rem et personam. ERROR TO THE FRANKLIN CIRCUIT. The case stated. THIS was an ordinary proceeding by petition, in which Graham was plaintiff and Swigert was defendant, on a supersedeas bond executed by the defendant as security for Strader, Gorman and Armstrong, to remove a case decided by this Court to the Supreme... |
|
Cases |
|
Grant v. McDonogh |
7 La.Ann. 447, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1852) |
1852 |
Appeal from the Second District Court of New Orleans. The case was tried by a jury before Lea, J. |
|
Cases |
|
Gray v. Regan |
1 Cushm. 304, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
A demurrer to a bill in chancery, in which the allegations of the bill are denied, is bad. Held, a party cannot qualify his demurrer, or give it any other operation than what the law gives. A party cannot demur to the whole bill, and at the same time answer to part. When a demurrer is intended to reach only part of the bill, it should definitely... |
|
Cases |
|
Green v. Lane |
Busb.Eq. 102, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1852) |
1852 |
However the general rule may be, both here and in England, as to whether a will and codicil, when admitted to probate as one instrument, must be so construed, yet this Court will not, in determining the particular case before it, overlook the fact that the testator calls the second paper a codicil, and that the bill and answer so designate it.... |
|
Cases |
|
Green v. McCarroll |
2 Cushm. 427, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (October 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The plea to the bill of discovery was properly treated as a nullity; for it presented a question proper to be made in an action at law, and showed no reason why a discovery should not be made. The judgment, in overruling the demurrer to plaintiff's replication, did not prejudice the rights of G., as he could make the same defence under the general... |
|
Cases |
|
Griffin v. Chubb |
7 Tex. 603, Supreme Court of Texas (January 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The case of Collard v. Gay (1 Tex. R., 494) cited and explained. If an authority were necessary, we have that of the Supreme Court of the United States, for holding a question, decided without argument, open for consideration. In an action for malicious prosecution, it is competent for the defendant to prove, under the general issue, for the... |
|
Cases |
|
Grigsby v. Chappell |
5 Rich. 443, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (May 01, 1852) |
1852 |
The owner of a toll bridge is not a common carrier: his obligation is to keep the bridge in proper condition for the safe passage of passengers and goods, and only for negligence in so keeping it is he liable. |
|
Cases |
|