| Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
| Gurnee v. Dessies |
1 Johns. 508 (January 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Covenant will not lie in this state, on a contract to be performed in Pennsylvania, with a scrawl and the word seal in the locus sigilli, tho', by the law of that state, this constitutes a... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
|
| Hostler's Adm'r v. Smith |
1 Mur. 103, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1806) |
1806 |
An Executor appeals from the judgment of the county court and enters into bond with security. The bond is binding on the parties; and on a Scire Facias against the security founded on the appeal bond and on a judgment in the superior court against the Executor, judgment given in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff brought suit against the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Jackson v. Jackson |
1 Johns. 424, Supreme Court of New York (August 01, 1806) |
1806 |
A citizen of this state married awife in this state, and after living together for more than a year, the wife left her husband, and went into the state of Vermont, and there obtained a divorce under the laws of that state, on the ground of ill treatment and severe temper, and then returned to this state, where she has since resided. In an action... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
| Jackson v. Jackson |
1 Johns. 424 (August 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Covenant will not lie in this state, on a contract to be performed in Pennsylvania, with a scrawl and the word seal in the locus sigilli, tho', by the law of that state, this constitutes a... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
| Jones v. Jones |
1 Hen. & M. 3, Superior Court of Chancery of Virginia (September 16, 1806) |
1806 |
An attachment will not lie for one joint complainant against another, who has received more than his proportion of a decree. On overruling the motion in such case, costs were directed to be taxed, including an attorney's fee. THIS was a motion on behalf of Robert Jones, for an attachment against Ambrose Jones, for a contempt in obstructing a decree... |
|
Cases |
|
| Kennedy v. Gibbes |
2 Des. 380, Court of Chancery of South Carolina (May 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Complainant seeking to be relieved from a bond, as surety, on account of an alleged extension of credit to the principal, by a new agreement, is not entitled to the relief sought; because he did not prove that he was a mere surety in the bond, in which he was bound jointly and severally with the other obligors; and because he did not prove that the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Lining v. Peyton |
2 Des. 375, Court of Chancery of South Carolina (May 01, 1806) |
1806 |
A purchaser of land, held in trust, to certain uses, with proviso, authorizing a sale, and re-investment of the purchase money, to the same uses, is not bound to see to the application of the purchase money to the purposes of the trust. A trustee directed to be changed in the manner prescribed by law. |
|
Cases |
|
| Maley v. Shattuck |
3 Cranch 458, Supreme Court of the United States (February 01, 1806) |
1806 |
ON the 20th of August, 1804, Jared Shattuck exhibited his libel in the district court of the United States, for the district of Pennsylvania, in the following form: The commander of a United States ship of war, if he seizes a vessel on the high seas, without probable cause is liable to make restitution in value, with damages and costs, even... |
|
Cases |
|
| Moore's Ex'r v. Aylett's Ex'r |
1 Hen. & M. 29, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (October 14, 1806) |
1806 |
If it be agreed between a mortgagor and mortgagee, that, in case the debt be not paid, the mortgagee may sell the property, and in consequence thereof, he sells, (without proof of fraud,) he is accountable to the mortgagor for the surplus of the sum, for which he sells, above the amount of the debt, with interest on such surplus until payment; but... |
|
Cases |
|
| Parish v. Gray |
6 Call 18, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (April 01, 1806) |
1806 |
The only real plaintiff in the cause is Jenny Gray; and the mention of her children has no other effect than as serving to shew, that a verdict in her favour would enure to their benefit. It was therefore a mere redundancy, without any operation, as the same consequence would have followed from the verdict, whether those words were inserted or not.... |
|
Cases |
|
| Pease v. Burt |
3 Day 485, Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut (November 01, 1806) |
1806 |
The right of bail to arrest and confine the person of his principal, is transitory, and may be exercised wherever the latter may be found. Semb. But if the bail, in arresting his principal, makes use of more force than is necessary for the purpose, he will be liable for false imprisonment. THIS was an action of false imprisonment. The declaration... |
|
Cases |
|
| Peck v. Randall |
1 Johns. 165, Supreme Court of New York (January 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Under the ac?? for giving relief against absent and absconding debtors, the creditor cannot maintain a suit at law for his debt, against the trustees appointed pursuant to the act before the demand has been proved or adjusted, and the dividend declared. The proper remedy is by petition to the equity power of the court, under which the proceedings... |
|
Cases |
|
| Peck v. Randall |
1 Johns. 165 (January 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Covenant will not lie in this state, on a contract to be performed in Pennsylvania, with a scrawl and the word seal in the locus sigilli, tho', by the law of that state, this constitutes a... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
|
| Pile v. Shannon |
Hard. 53, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (April 01, 1806) |
1806 |
In the re-hearing in this cause, it is alleged that the former decision of this court is in part founded on a privity between Meriwether, Shannon, and Daniel, when no privity exists--that as no privity exists, any appearance of equity against Daniel ought not to extend to Meriwether or his assignee unless coupled with fraud, and no fraud is alleged... |
|
Cases |
|
| Porter v. Brisbane's Ex'rs |
2 Brev. 496, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (November 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Judgment against bail on sci. fa. where the action against the principal was originally in detinue, and was changed by the subsequent proceedings to trover, was, notwithstanding, held to be sufficiently regular. |
|
Cases |
|
| Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs |
1 Hen. & M. 181, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (November 20, 1806) |
1806 |
Additional circumstances, merely confirming facts proved in the original cause, do not furnish sufficient grounds for a bill of review. Where a Jury have found a verdict for the plaintiff in an action of debt on a bond, an account of transactions, which (although partly subsequent to the date of the bond) are old and stale, ought not to be allowed,... |
|
Cases |
|
| Reid v. Delorme |
2 Brev. 76, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Motion for a new trial, and in arrest of judgment. Action on the case for defamation. The declaration stated that the defendant, to defame the plaintiff, maliciously wrote and published a malicious and defamatory libel, and did prefer a complaint against the Attorney General, by way of petition to the Legislature, setting forth that the Attorney... |
|
Cases |
|
| Richards v. Stewart |
2 Day 328, Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut (June 01, 1806) |
1806 |
In an action before the City Court, it is not necessary to aver, that one of the parties lived within the city at the time the cause of action arose. A witness may not testify to the contents of a paper belonging to him and in his possession, without producing it. This was an action of trover, originally brought before the City court of the City of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Richardson v. Noyes |
2 Mass. 56, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (March 01, 1806) |
1806 |
In every question arising on the construction of a will, it is alike dictated by justice, common sense, and the rules of law, that the first inquiry shall be, What was the true intention of the testator? And if that can be satisfactorily discovered, the next is, Can such intention be carried into effect, consistently with the rules of law? And if... |
|
Cases |
|
| Rowton v. Rowton |
1 Hen. & M. 92, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (November 12, 1806) |
1806 |
Under the act of 1785, giving a widow dower in a trust estate, it seems that she is entitled to dower in an equitable estate in feesimple, contracted, by verbal agreement, to be conveyed to her late husband, provided the contract be proved to be such as would authorize a Court of Equity to decree the legal estate. The statute of frauds will avail... |
|
Cases |
|
| Sadler's Ex'rs v. Green |
1 Hen. & M. 26, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (October 13, 1806) |
1806 |
The appellee has suffered two years to elapse without making any application to the Court respecting the security to the appeal. It would not now be proper to rule the appellants to security without notice. Let a rule be made on the legatees returnable to the next term, to shew cause why security should not be given. Afterwards, Thursday, October... |
|
Cases |
|
| Schmidt v. United Ins. Co. |
1 Johns. 249, Supreme Court of New York (May 01, 1806) |
1806 |
If the port to which a vessel is destined, as described in a policy of insurance, be actually blockaded, the assured may abandon as for a total loss. The interdiction of commerce with the port of destination, by means of a blockade, is a peril within the policy; and the going to another port afterwards, for the purpose of delivering the goods, was... |
|
Cases |
|
| Schmidt v. United Ins. Co. |
1 Johns. 249 (May 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Covenant will not lie in this state, on a contract to be performed in Pennsylvania, with a scrawl and the word seal in the locus sigilli, tho', by the law of that state, this constitutes a... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
|
| Shotwell v. Thornall |
2 N.J.L. 136, Supreme Court of Judicature of New Jersey (November 01, 1806) |
1806 |
The action is wholly misconceived. The overseers expended the money of the township, they must account with the town for the money expended; and have no authority to demand the same of defendant below. If any action can be sustained, it must by the township, in its corporate name. CITED IN Inhabitants Saddle River v. Colfax, 1 Halst. 115; Board v.... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Doherty |
2 Tenn. 80, Superior Court of Law and Equity of Tennessee (September 01, 1806) |
1806 |
The evidence of a witness who has not been, or can not be sworn, as a child under fourteen years of age who has no sense of the obligation of an oath nor of the consequences of false swearing, can not be heard by the grand jury. A person above fourteen years of age is presumed to be doli capax; but the presumption is otherwise of a person under... |
|
Cases |
|
| Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton |
6 Call 21, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (April 01, 1806) |
1806 |
The whole tenor of the will of Philip Rootes the elder, shews, that the sons were to be liable to make up the deficiencies of the legacies; and therefore an account should have been taken of the estates received by them, in order to ascertain their proportions. That it is necessary, in the case of a creditor, to bring a previous suit against the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Teasdale v. Atkinson |
2 Brev. 48, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (April 01, 1806) |
1806 |
The rules and principles of the common law are strong against fraud in every shape, and would be, perhaps, sufficient without the aid of the statutes of Eliz., to avoid the operation of contracts entered into with a fraudulent end in view, as being in their nature essentially vicious and corrupt, so far as they may be in their nature calculated to... |
|
Cases |
|
| U.S. v. Smith |
3 Wheeler C.C. 100, Circuit Court, D New York (April 01, 1806) |
1806 |
At law. Pleas in abatement to indictments of defendants, under Act June 5, 1794, ยง 5 (1 Stat. 384), for misdemeanors in beginning, setting on foot, and providing the means for, a military expedition against dominions of a foreign power, with which the United States were at peace. Preliminary to the finding of the indictment, Ogden's sureties... |
|
Cases |
|
| U.S. v. the Penelope |
2 Pet. Adm. 438, District Court, D Pennsylvania (January 01, 1806) |
1806 |
This was an information filed by A. J. Dallas, Esq. against the schooner Penelope and her cargo for a supposed breach of the first section of the act of congress, entitled An act to suspend the commercial intercourse between the United States and certain parts of the Island of St. Domingo. [2 Stat. 351.] The facts of the case were these: Mr.... |
|
Cases |
|
| Vuyton v. Brenell |
4 Dall. 205, Circuit Court, D Pennsylvania (October 01, 1806) |
1806 |
In this case, the following points were decided, which are not stated in the report: 1. If the defendant has put in several pleas, he may withdraw one of them, without leave, at any time. 2. If there be a negative and affirmative plea, the plaintiff's counsel must begin and conclude on the negative issue; and the counsel for the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Wheelwright v. Depeyster |
1 Johns. 471, Supreme Court of New York (August 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Some coffee belonging to American citizens had been taken by a French privateer, and carried into St. Jago de Cuba, and there sold provisionally, by order of the French agency established there, and afterwards condemned by a court of admiralty at St. Domingo upon a proces verbal, and proceedings at St. Jago; the goods having been purchased, bona... |
|
Cases |
|
| Wheelwright v. Depeyster |
1 Johns. 471 (August 01, 1806) |
1806 |
Covenant will not lie in this state, on a contract to be performed in Pennsylvania, with a scrawl and the word seal in the locus sigilli, tho', by the law of that state, this constitutes a... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
|
| Winslow v. Beal |
6 Call 44, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (April 01, 1806) |
1806 |
I have some doubt as to the action; for I am not satisfied that the mistake is not cured by the statute of jeofails; which declares that the omission of vi et armis, or other formal words, shall not vitiate. But I give no opinion upon that point, as I am clear as to several other parts of the case. With respect to the objection, that all the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Worthington v. Bicknell |
2 H. & J. 58, Court of Appeals of Maryland (December 01, 1806) |
1806 |
A executed a mortgage to B, of real and personal property, to secure the payment of a sum in the then current money, and it was afterwards agreed between them, that the personal property should be released, on A's endorsing on the mortgage that it was a specie debt. A afterwards conveyed his equity of redemption in the real estate to C, who, on the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Abier v. Dazey |
2 Del.Cas. 30, Court of Common Pleas of Delaware (October 01, 1807) |
1807 |
From the evidence adduced, the Chief Justice said that his brethren were of opinion that the petitioner was transferred to Isaac Burton, a black man and husband to Abier, by way of gift; and a special decree was entered in favor of Abier. |
|
Cases |
|
| Abier v. Dazey |
2 Del.Cas. 30 (October 01, 1807) |
1807 |
From the evidence adduced, the Chief Justice said that his brethren were of opinion that the petitioner was transferred to Isaac Burton, a black man and husband to Abier, by way of gift;... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
|
| Beauchamp v. Mudd |
Hard. 163, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 01, 1807) |
1807 |
The first error assigned is, that the court erred in sustaining the defendant's demurrer to the plaintiff's replication. To support this assignment the plaintiff relies upon the insufficiency of the fourth plea of the defendant, which produced the replication and demurrer. While the defendant contends, it is restricted to the replication. The... |
|
Cases |
|
| Bethune & Co. v. Gibson |
2 Brev. 501, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1807) |
1807 |
The power, or control, over property, is equivalent to possession, and entitles the party to claim as creditor in possession, under the attachment act; and only the service of the writ (not its mere lodgment) binds property. |
|
Cases |
|
| Bland v. Wyatt |
1 Hen. & M. 543, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (November 10, 1807) |
1807 |
A bill was filed on behalf of certain infants against the heirs of their guardian who died intestate, the sheriff to whom his estate was committed, (no administrator having qualified,) his surviving security in the bond given for the performance of his duty as guardian, and the adm'r of the other security, as co-defendants. No process having been... |
|
Cases |
|
| Boiserard v. Fogartie |
2 Brev. 199, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1807) |
1807 |
The substance of the opinion was, that the note being indorsed, was, as to the indorser, a new note. He was liable for the whole of the money mentioned in the note. That the consideration of the indorsement was usurious, and, therefore, void; because the money payable on the indorsement was agreed to be paid at a future day, upon condition of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Burton v. Cannon |
2 Del.Cas. 30 (October 01, 1807) |
1807 |
Covenant will not lie in this state, on a contract to be performed in Pennsylvania, with a scrawl and the word seal in the locus sigilli, tho', by the law of that state, this constitutes a... |
|
Trial Court Orders |
|
| Carson v. Bryant's Adm'rs |
2 Brev. 159, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (April 01, 1807) |
1807 |
This action, which has been invented in this State, as a substitute for the action of trover, is founded in tort, and does not survive against the personal representatives of the party who committed the injury, according to the determination in the case of Hambly v. Trott, Cowp. 374, and the maxim of law, quod actio personalis moritur cum persona;... |
|
Cases |
|
| Com. v. Ragsdale |
2 Hen. & M. 8, Superior Court of Chancery of Virginia (September 07, 1807) |
1807 |
A decree being entered for the sale of mortgaged property, of which a person not a party to the suit is found to be in possession; a rule may be made upon such person; and, unless he shews a paramount right in himself, the property may be ordered to be delivered to the commissioners acting under the decree; and, if necessary, such order may be... |
|
Cases |
|
| Contee v. Cooke |
2 H. & J. 179, Court of Appeals of Maryland (December 01, 1807) |
1807 |
The court are of opinion, that the facts set forth by the complainant in his bill of complaint, are not sufficient to warrant the court of chancery to interpose and grant the relief prayed by the complainant. DECREE AFFIRMED. |
|
Cases |
|
| Cortelyou v. Cortelyou |
2 N.J.L. 318, Supreme Court of Judicature of New Jersey (November 01, 1807) |
1807 |
The court reversed the judgment. |
|
Cases |
|
| Cringan v. Nicolson's Ex'rs |
1 Hen. & M. 429, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (October 16, 1807) |
1807 |
A contract under seal decreed, at the instance of one of the parties, to be set aside, as having been vacated and abandoned; the other (at whose request, and for whose accommodation, it was expressly made) having for a long time neglected to carry it into effect, and shewn by particular acts (though without any acknowledgment under seal) that he... |
|
Cases |
|
| Crow v. Bell |
2 Brev. 140, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (April 01, 1807) |
1807 |
In considering this case it is not easy to discover upon what ground the instrument of writing, which was adduced in evidence to support the action, was meant to operate. An opinion may have been entertained, perhaps, that the contingent remainder over to the lawful heirs of the donor, James Crow, upon the death of Jenny Crow, without issue, of her... |
|
Cases |
|
| Cunningham v. Caldwell |
Hard. 123, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (April 01, 1807) |
1807 |
First. They contend that where the party applying has been in default, chancery will not grant relief. But how many cases are there at law, where the party was in fault, and yet the chancellor grants relief. All penalties and forfeitures are incurred by negligence; but chancery inquires what ex equo et bono, ought the party to receive, and... |
|
Cases |
|
| De Sobry v. De Laistre |
2 H. & J. 191, Court of Appeals of Maryland (December 01, 1807) |
1807 |
Parol evidence admitted to prove the manner in which wills are made and proved in France A copy of a will executed in Philadelphia and transmitted to the Island of Martinique by the testator, certified by a notary public of that Island, and returned under a commission issued to take testimony, is sufficiently authentieated by having the certificate... |
|
Cases |
|
| Eldridge v. Fisher |
1 Hen. & M. 559, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (November 17, 1807) |
1807 |
Every point in this cause has been so fully discussed both by the bar, and the Court in the case of Hill v. Burrow, (which I cannot distinguish from this, except as to the date of the will, which, in that case was antecedent to the act for docking entails,) and in the case of Tate v. Tally, as to preclude all further discussion upon them,... |
|
Cases |
|