TitleCitationYearSummaryMost RelevantTypeStatus
Pendleton's Adm'rs v. Stuart 6 Munf. 377, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (April 13, 1819) 1819 Owing to the peculiar and perplexed state of the assets in this case, making it difficult, if not impracticable, for the appellants to have pleaded in relation to them, at law; and owing, also, to the absence of the principal Counsel of the appellants, and the withdrawal of the other, at the trial in the second action, whereby the appellants were...   Cases  
Percival & Johnson v. Nevill 1 Nott & McC. 452, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (January 01, 1819) 1819 The master of an apprentice is not liable, without special contract, for medicine administered to, and attendance on, his apprentice, where the master did not send for the physician, and where the services were not rendered under his roof.   Cases  
Peytavin v. Hopkins 6 Mart.(o.s.) 256, Supreme Court of Louisiana (February 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the second district. [For prior opinion, see 5 Mart. (O. S.) 438.]   Cases  
Philadelphia Poor Guardians v. Bristol Tp. Poor Overseers Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (October 01, 1819) 1819 If an unmarried indented female servant become pregnant, and be removed by her mistress into another township, for the purpose of lying-in, the expenses of which the mistress is able and agrees to pay, the overseers of that township may, before the birth of the child, remove her to the place of her last legal settlement. But they have no power to...   Cases  
Pierce v. Curtis 6 Mart.(o.s.) 418, Supreme Court of Louisiana (March 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the first district.   Cases  
Piernas v. Blanque's Syndics 6 Mart.(o.s.) 577, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.   Cases  
Police Jury v. McDonogh 7 Mart.(o.s.) 8, Supreme Court of Louisiana (July 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans. The plaintiffs claimed from the defendant four thousand and odd dollars, paid out of the parish treasury to planters ordered to work on his levee, in the year 1815. There was judgment against him, and he appealed.   Cases  
Reid v. Colcock 1 Nott & McC. 592, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 The attorney of record is a competent witness for his client. Every assuming to dispose of the property of another, or the least intermeddling with it, in a manner subversive of the dominion of the owner, is sufficient evidence of a conversion. Property in a chattel cannot be transferred by a parol gift, without delivery; but by delivery is not...   Cases  
Riden v. Frion 3 Mur. 577, Supreme Court of North Carolina (November 01, 1819) 1819 It is not deemed necessary to decide the question of title arising upon the title, because the Court is clearly of opinion, that the law is against the Plaintiffs upon the statute of limitations. Wherever the statute of limitations is a bar to the recovery of one of the parties, in such action, it operates against the whole, because the disability...   Cases  
Rouville v. Rouville 6 Mart.(o.s.) 702, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.   Cases  
SEIZURE OF THE SHIP CARMELITA. 5 U.S. Op. Atty. Gen. 719 (December 16, 1819) 1819     Administrative Decisions & Guidance  
Shumate v. Dunbar 6 Munf. 430, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (November 09, 1819) 1819 1. If it be stated, in the transcript of a decree in Chancery, that the cause came on to be heard on the bill, answer and exhibits; such hearing must be understood to have been in exclusion of the depositions contained in the record; no proof appearing of notice of the time and place of taking those depositions. 2. In such case, if...   Cases  
Skinner v. McDowell 2 Nott & McC. 68, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 Possession alone will not enable the plaintiff to maintain trespass against the rightful owner.   Cases  
Smith v. Kniskern 4 Johns.Ch. 9, Chancery Court of New York (January 01, 1819) 1819 A testator, possessed of a large real and personal estate, bequeathed to his wife his household furniture, &c., and her comfortable support and maintenance out of his estate, to be, from time to time, rendered and paid to her by his executors, and the use of one room in his dwelling-house, during all such time as she should continue to be...   Cases  
State v. Cherry 3 Mur. 7, Supreme Court of North Carolina (January 01, 1819) 1819 Under the act of 1811, ch. 6, an indictment for murder may be intelligible and explicit, and contain sufficient to induce the Court to proceed to judgment, if the time and place of making the assault, be set forth, although they be not repeated as to the mortal blow. The indictment charged that Abraham, a...   Cases  
State v. Danforth 3 Conn. 112, Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut (June 21, 1819) 1819 A battery, with intent to maim and kill, is, by the common law of this state, a high crime and misdemeanour, and may be prosecuted, as such, before the superior court. Imprisonment for life, cannot be inflicted as the punishment of an offence at common; and therefore, in a prosecution for such offence, the intervention of a grand jury is not...   Cases  
State v. Dodd 3 Mur. 226, Supreme Court of North Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 The indictment charges a kind of quasi perjury, unknown in our laws, and entirely inconsistent with our ideas of criminal acts. For, in the absence of positive acts of the Legislature, where the will of the Legislature stands for the reason of the law, we know of no rule or criterion by which an act can be ascertained to be criminal, but that of...   Cases  
State v. Jim 3 Mur. 3, Supreme Court of North Carolina (January 01, 1819) 1819 Indictment against A. for breaking a dwelling house in the day-time, no person being therein, and feloniously taking therefrom a bank note of the value of five pounds, concludes against the form of the statute: A. cannot be convicted of a capital felony. Such indictment should conclude against the form of the statutes. The statute of 1806, ch. 6,...   Cases  
State v. Sparrow 3 Mur. 487, Supreme Court of North Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 It is said in the books that the Crown may demand that the witnesses should retire in order that each may be examined in the absence of the others; and that the same order will be made on the request of the Defendant, as a matter of indulgence, but not of right. It is probable that the difference arose from the practice of not suffering witnesses...   Cases The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled.
State v. Whyte 2 Nott & McC. 174, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (November 01, 1819) 1819 A prohibition may issue upon a suggestion that either the cause originally, or some collateral matter arising therein does not belong to that jurisdiction, but to the cognizance of some other Court. A prohibition will not lie to an inferior Court after sentence, unless the want of jurisdiction appear on the face of the proceedings.(a.) A...   Cases  
Sturges v. Crowninshield 17 U.S. 122, Supreme Court of the United States (February 17, 1819) 1819 State bankrupt law. Since the adoption of the constitution of the United States a state has authority to pass a bankrupt law, provided such law do not impair the obligation of contracts, within the meaning of the constitution, art. 1, § 10; and provided they be no act of congress in force to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy,...   Cases The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled.
Swanzy v. Hunt 2 Nott & McC. 211, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (November 01, 1819) 1819 The sheriff is a mere ministerial officer, and is justifiable in serving a foreign attachment, though the defendant may have been in the state at the time the writ was issued. No person can take advantage of a fraudulent deed, but creditors and purchasers; but the sheriff in attaching property of a debtor, in the possession of a third person, to...   Cases  
Talbot v. Brockman 1 A.K.Marsh. 555, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (June 07, 1819) 1819 This writ of error is brought to reverse a judgment recovered by Brockman, in an action prosecuted by him against Talbot in the court below. Two question are made by the assignment of errors. The first involves an inquiry into the sufficiency of the declaration. And the second contests the propriety of the decision of that court in overruling...   Cases  
Terril v. Flower 6 Mart.(o.s.) 583, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the first district.   Cases  
Tregre v. Tregre 6 Mart.(o.s.) 665, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1819) 1819 Appeal from the court of the first district.   Cases  
Vanhook v. Rogers' Ex'r 3 Mur. 178, Supreme Court of North Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 Persons claiming under a general description in a will, are entitled, if they can bring themselves within the description, when by the will of the testator, a fund is to be divided. Therefore, where property is given to the children of A, and no time is fixed for a division, it is divisible by the will at the testator's death, although the executor...   Cases  
Walker v. Kelly 3 Mur. 265, Supreme Court of North Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 This cause coming on to be heard, the substance of the Complainants' bill appeared to be, that John Walker died some time in the year 1813, having made a last will and testament, of which he appointed the Defendants executors, who proved the will, and took upon themselves the burthen of the execution thereof. That by the said will he bequeathed to...   Cases  
Wallis v. Frazier 2 Nott & McC. 180, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (November 01, 1819) 1819 In an action of assumpsit upon a warranty, it is not necessary to state that it was in writing.   Cases  
Wicks v. Chew 4 H. & J. 543, Court of Appeals of Maryland (December 01, 1819) 1819 The chancellor has no authority to decree a deed of manumission to be recorded, where it has not been enrolled within the time prescribed by law. APPEAL from the Court of Chancery. On the 11th of September 1816, Araminta Chew, and others, (the appellees,) by John Davis their next friend, filed a petition against the heirs and devisees of Richard...   Cases  
Wright v. Latham 3 Mur. 298, Supreme Court of North Carolina (May 01, 1819) 1819 The testimony of Pearce is objected to, because it is said it goes to establish the special count, and form a contract variant from that set forth in the indorsement, which is in writing. Without at all impugning the rule, or believing that it ought to be impugned, which forbids the introduction of parol testimony to alter a written agreement, I...   Cases  
Young v. Robinson 5 N.J.L. 689, Supreme Court of Judicature of New Jersey (November 01, 1819) 1819 Devise in 1755 to A for life; then to B and his heirs male; then to C and her heirs male; B and C die in A's life. C has son D, who entered into possession in 1773 and sold to E in fee. In virtue of the statute (Pat. 54), E holds the fee against the heirs of D. In ejectment. This action was brought for the recovery of a farm in the county of Salem,...   Cases  
Anderson v. Turner 3 A.K.Marsh. 131, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (December 07, 1820) 1820 This writ of error is prosecuted by Anderson to reverse a judgment recovered against him in an action of ejectment, brought in the circuit court by Turner. On the trial in that court, for the purpose of showing his title, Turner produced in evidence a deed of bargain and sale, purporting to have been made by him by Presley Peak, the surviving...   Cases  
Anderson's Adm'r v. Davies' Adm'r 6 Munf. 484, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (January 27, 1820) 1820 1. In a Court of Equity, several mortgages tho' appearing, upon their face, to be for distinct debts, will, under circumstances, be considered as merely additional evidences of, and securities for one original debt. 2. Quære, whether it be regular, in a decree for sale of mortgaged premises, to direct the proceeds of such sale to be paid over...   Cases  
Bazzi v. Rose 8 Mart.(o.s.) 149, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1820) 1820 Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans.   Cases  
Bernard v. Vignaud 8 Mart.(o.s.) 442, Supreme Court of Louisiana (July 01, 1820) 1820 Appeal from the court of the first district. The petition stated that, at the time of the death of the plaintiffs' mother, they were minors, and one Joseph Fouque took upon himself to act as their tutor and curator ad bona, and not only assisted as such at the inventory of her estate, but took possession of the plaintiffs' estate, to the amount of...   Cases  
Billy ads. State 2 Nott & McC. 356, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1820) 1820 The act of 1819, (enacting, that thereafter all justices, &c. then in commission who had not qualified before the Governor, shall within ninety days after the passing of the act, qualify before the clerk, &c.) does not embrace justices in commission who had qualified under the act of 1800. It is not requisite to the validity of the office of...   Cases  
Blakeney ads. Kirkley 2 Nott & McC. 544, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (November 01, 1820) 1820 Where a person much indebted made a deed without consideration, to one of his children (out of several) of all his property, and declared to a witness, that he did it, to avoid paying a particular debt, Held, that the deed was fraudulent and void as to creditors, under the statute 13 Eliz. Where a man owes a sum of money at the time of making a...   Cases  
Blanton v. Taylor Gilmer 209, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (November 02, 1820) 1820 The court is of opinion, upon the testimony that the deed of March 1809, in the proceedings contained, from Wm. B. Langhorne to Samuel Taylor, is fraudulent and void, so far as it respects the creditors of the said Langhorne; but as the dower interest of Mrs. Langhorne in the tract of land conveyed to Thomas Hobson by the deed, also among the...   Cases  
Blondeau v. Gales 8 Mart.(o.s.) 313, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1820) 1820 Appeal from the court of the first district.   Cases  
Boggess v. Boggess 6 Munf. 486, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (January 29, 1820) 1820 1. If the declaration in detinue do not contain a demand, that the defendant render to the plaintiff, the property sued for; yet, after verdict on the plea of non detinet, judgment ought not to be arrested. THE declaration in this case was as follows:--Loudoun County, to wit: Robert Boggess complains of Henley Boggess, in...   Cases  
Brush v. Wilkins 4 Johns.Ch. 506, Chancery Court of New York (January 01, 1820) 1820 Implied revocations of wills are not within the statute of frauds. Subsequent marriage and birth of a child are an implied revocation of a will. And such revocations, being presumptive merely, may be rebutted by circumstances. First decided in 34 Car. ??. in England, according to the opinion of Sir J. Nicholl, (2 Shower, 253.) as to personal...   Cases  
Burnet v. Courts 5 H. & J. 78, Court of Appeals of Maryland (June 01, 1820) 1820 Burnet and Rigden recovered a judgment in Charles county court against John Campbell, who afterwards superseded the same, with William Courts and Francis Newman as his sureties. A ca. sa. issued on the supersedeas judgment, returnable to March term 1810, on which Wil liam Courts alone, was taken, and the execution was entered, not called by...   Cases  
Calvit v. Haynes 8 Mart.(o.s.) 712, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1820) 1820 Appeal from the court of the sixth district.   Cases  
Carneal's Heirs v. May 2 A.K.Marsh. 587, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 21, 1820) 1820 On the twenty-seventh day of June, 1795, William May sold to Thomas Carneal, twenty-four different tracts of land, supposed to contain twenty-three thousand two hundred and fifty-six acres, for the sum of twenty-one hundred and fifty pounds. Carneal gave his obligation for the purchase money, and also, afterwards, on the fifteenth day of May, 1799,...   Cases  
Chiles v. Coleman 2 A.K.Marsh. 296, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (April 01, 1820) 1820 ON AN APPEAL FROM A DECREE OF THE MADISON CIRCUIT COURT. This was an action of ejectment. On the trial, the lessor of the plaintiff produced in evidence a patent from the commonwealth to William Hays for a pre-emption of 1000 acres, bearing date the 10th of January, 1785, and a deed of conveyance from the heirs of William Hays to himself, bearing...   Cases  
Clayton v. Mitchell 2 Del.Cas. 532, Court of Chancery of Delaware (February 01, 1820) 1820 [Bill for an accounting, filed February 10, 1818. John Mitchell thereafter filed an answer and a cross-bill, to which the plaintiffs severally replied.]   Cases  
Clayton v. Mitchell 2 Del.Cas. 532 (February 01, 1820) 1820 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  
Colquhoun v. Atkinson 6 Munf. 550, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (March 23, 1820) 1820 1. In general, a deed is to be taken as having been executed on the day of it's date, unless it appear to have been on some other day. 2. The testimony of the person who executed the deed, was received as fixing the time when it was executed; notwithstanding the testimony of two witnesses to his acknowledgment to the contrary when not on oath; he...   Cases  
Crompton v. Ulmer 2 Nott & McC. 429, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1820) 1820 Under the act of 1791, the Court of Common Pleas has no right to grant writs of Partition, except in cases of intestacy. The Court of Common Pleas had no power to order a sale of lands under the act of 1748.   Cases  
Davidson v. Davidson's Ex'rs 1 Hawks 163, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1820) 1820 The general principle on which this case must be decided, is, that where such words are used in a will, in relation to personal property, as would have created an estate-tail in real property, they give the absolute property in personalty, and the limitations over are void. The exception to the rule is, that if it appear from any clause or...   Cases  
134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151