| Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
| Prevost v. Johnson |
9 Mart.(o.s.) 123, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the fifth district. The plaintiffs stated that they are the owners and proprietors of a tract of land, described in the petition, sold in 1780 by V. Lesassier to J. B. Macarty, from whom their ancestor purchased it, the same having been possessed and enjoyed by the plaintiffs and those under whom they claim for thirty years... |
|
Cases |
|
| Price v. Sykes |
1 Hawks 87, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1820) |
1820 |
The Court having thus intimated an opinion, Seawell contended, that if Complainant got a decree, he could not recover costs. The Defendants are heirs at law, having no knowledge of the facts upon which the Equity of Sykes and Price rested, and some of them are infants, who are not to blame for the defence set up here, or the claim asserted at Law... |
|
Cases |
|
| Rachel v. Pearsall |
8 Mart.(o.s.) 702, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the seventh district. |
|
Cases |
|
| Richardson v. Broughton |
2 Nott & McC. 417, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Where a person goes into the possession of land, under a conditional agreement to purchase it, he cannot hold adversely to the claim of the person under whom he went into possession, so as to acquire a title by the statute of limitations. Where a person claims land under a sheriff's sale, the judgment and execution, under which the land was sold,... |
|
Cases |
|
| Seghers v. His Creditors |
8 Mart.(o.s.) 136, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1820) |
1820 |
[For subsequent opinion, see 10 Mart. (O. S.) 54.] |
|
Cases |
|
| Spiers v. Alexander |
1 Hawks 67, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1820) |
1820 |
When a gift of a chattel is found or stated in a case, a delivery is presumed; because without it, it is not a gift: And such possession of the donee will be presumed to continue, unless the contrary be found or stated--especially if it appear, that another claimed and exercised ownership from a particular subsequent period. Husband and wife cannot... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Fisher |
2 Nott & McC. 261, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (January 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Unless a verdict is clearly and manifestly against evidence or wholly without evidence, the Court will not set it aside. That which was a cause of Challenge to a Juror, shall not be made the ground of a new trial. |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Jones |
10 Tenn. 22, Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee (May 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Upon this record one question is, whether this is a bad indictment for not having inserted in it, that the harboring was without the consent of the owner. And we are all of opinion, that the omission of this averment is fatal. If the indictment be so drawn that all the facts stated in it may be true, and yet the defendant be innocent,... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Lowber |
2 Del.Cas. 557, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Delaware (June 08, 1820) |
1820 |
An indictment was found against John Lowber, one of the Justices of the Peace for Kent County, at the November Sessions, 1819, for altering a counterfeit bank note. It was tried at May Sessions, 1820, and Lowber was convicted by the jury, and the court passed judgment against him. On an application made to this Court on the 8th instant for the... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Scott |
1 Hawks 24, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1820) |
1820 |
A person called as a Juror in a capital case, said on oath, that he had not formed nor expressed an opinion respecting the guilt or innocence of the prisoner; and, after the verdict, it was proved that he had declared, a few minutes before to a third person, that he could not serve, because he had made up his opinion; which was... |
|
Cases |
|
| Sterling v. Fusilier |
7 Mart.(o.s.) 442, Supreme Court of Louisiana (February 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the third district. |
|
Cases |
|
| Stone v. Ware |
6 Munf. 541, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (March 22, 1820) |
1820 |
1. A creditor, by threatening to have execution levied, induced the debtor to allow him 15 per Centum per annum, upon the debt, and to give a bond as principal obligor, in which the creditor joined as surety, payable at a future day, to a third person, to whom the amount was bona fide due, and who knew nothing of such usurious agreement. The debtor... |
|
Cases |
|
| Sutcliffe v. McDowell |
2 Nott & McC. 251, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (January 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Where the drawer of an inland bill of exchange informed the payee, that he had withdrawn the funds, on which the bill was drawn, from the hands of the drawee, Held, that a presentment of the bill for payment was unnecessary. The doctrine of inland bills applies equally to checks upon banks. |
|
Cases |
|
| Taylor v. Bruce |
Gilmer 42, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (June 05, 1820) |
1820 |
Negotiable notes made by H. & H. indorsed by A. for the accommodation of H. & H. to be sold in market, purchased by B. from a broker who sells them for H. & H. at greater discount than 6 per cent., are not usurious in the hands of B., without proof that B. knew the facts. Quære. GEORGE KEITH TAYLOR adm'r of Holloway, brought a bill in the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Tessier v. Hall |
7 Mart.(o.s.) 411, Supreme Court of Louisiana (January 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the third district. |
|
Cases |
|
| The Wilson |
1 Brock 423, Circuit Court, D Virginia (May 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the district court of the United States for the district of Virginia. The brig Wilson, Ivory Huntress, commander, was libelled in the court below, and the vessel, with her tackle, apparel, and furniture, thirty-one demijohns of brandy, thirteen cases of gin, and several other articles, claimed as forfeited to the United States, for... |
|
Cases |
|
| Thompson's Adm'r v. Thompson's Ex'r |
6 Munf. 514, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (March 04, 1820) |
1820 |
The Court is of opinion, that the provision contained in the 54th section of the Act concerning Wills, &c., (R. Code of 1819, 1st vol. p. 388,) and which provides that the Emblements, severed between the 1st of March and 31st of December in any year, shall be assets in the hands of the executors, does not apply to this case, if it applies to the... |
|
Cases |
|
| U.S. v. Andrews |
5 City H. Rec. 120, Circuit Court, SD New York (September 15, 1820) |
1820 |
The defendant [Alexander McKim Andrews] was indicted under the second section of an act of congress, passed the 10th of May, 1800 [2 Stat. 70], which is in these words: It shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United States, or other person residing therein, to serve on board any vessel of the United States, employed or made use of in the... |
|
Cases |
|
| U.S. v. Malebran |
5 City H. Rec. 122, Circuit Court, D New York (January 01, 1820) |
1820 |
The defendant, a foreigner, and resident in this city, was indicted under the act of congress, of 1818 (1 Sess. 15th Cong. p. 81 [3 Stat. 450]), which act is, in effect, as follows: |
|
Cases |
|
| Ulzere v. Poeyfarre |
8 Mart.(o.s.) 155, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans. [For subsequent opinion, see Ulzire v. Poeyfarre, 2 Mart. (N. S.) 504.] |
|
Cases |
|
| Vance v. Reardon |
2 Nott & McC. 299, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (January 01, 1820) |
1820 |
To make out a title to personal property under a sheriff's sale, the production of the execution, under which the property was sold, is indispensable. Under the act of 1721, authorizing attested copies of all records certified by the clerks of the court to be given in evidence, it will not be sufficient to produce extracts; the whole record must be... |
|
Cases |
|
| Victoire v. Moulon |
8 Mart.(o.s.) 400, Supreme Court of Louisiana (July 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the first district. |
|
Cases |
|
| Walton v. Deignan |
2 Nott & McC. 248, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (January 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Under the Act of 1785, the Sheriff is authorized, in serving a domestic attachment, to take possession of goods of the defendant found in the possession of a third person. |
|
Cases |
|
| Waters v. Backus |
8 Mart.(o.s.) 1, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1820) |
1820 |
Appeal from the court of the first district. The petition stated, that the plaintiff purchased from the executor of Boisclair, a lot of ground of sixteen feet in front, with a depth of forty-five, having a right of passage and entry of four feet, in width from the front, along the whole depth, over the next lot, which belongs to the defendant,... |
|
Cases |
|
| Wooddy v. Flournoy |
6 Munf. 506, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (February 15, 1820) |
1820 |
The Court is of opinion that the second Count in the declaration is defective in this; that it does not aver that the appellant and his partner promised that the appellee should receive the bond of Cornelius Buck, but only sets out the writing in which such promise is alledged to be contained, as in the case of Cooke v. Simms in this Court. The... |
|
Cases |
|
| Allain v. Young |
9 Mart.(o.s.) 221, Supreme Court of Louisiana (January 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the third district. |
|
Cases |
|
| Arnold v. Mundy |
6 N.J.L. 1, Supreme Court of Judicature of New Jersey (November 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Abating a little want of courteousness towards the memory of some of the greatest luminaries of the English law, and indeed I may say, some of the greatest men that ever lived, I have been much gratified by the arguments presented by the counsel in this cause. They have investigated the subject with great care, and great ability, and they have... |
|
Cases |
|
| Backus v. Dudley |
3 Conn. 568, Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut (June 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Where a pauper of the town of G., residing in the town of S., was furnished, by the former town, with suitable accommodations therein, which he was solicited to return and accept; it was held, that S., after notice, could not furnish him with support, at the expense of G. But if this were otherwise, still G., in such case, would have no right to... |
|
Cases |
|
| Bay v. Tallmadge |
5 Johns.Ch. 305, Chancery Court of New York (January 01, 1821) |
1821 |
After judgment against bail, their character of bail is at an end; and they can no longer claim the privileges of sureties. Where bail become fixed at law with the payment of the debt of the defendant, their character of bail ceases. After judgment and execution against bail or sureties, there is an end to the relationship of principal and surety;... |
|
Cases |
|
| Bayon v. Vavasseur |
10 Mart.(o.s.) 61, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the second district. [For subsequent opinion, see 11 Mart. (O. S.) 639.] |
|
Cases |
|
| Bean v. Atwater |
4 Conn. 3, Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut (June 01, 1821) |
1821 |
The plaintiff can alone recover, on the facts stated in his declaration. If on examination of the covenant counted on, it appears, that there has been an entire performance of every stipulation on his part; this, undoubtedly, evinces a good cause of action for the whole consideration of the lands; but unless the declaration comports with this state... |
|
Cases |
|
| Beeler's Heirs v. Bullitt's Heirs |
3 A.K.Marsh. 280, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (April 09, 1821) |
1821 |
ON AN APPEAL FROM A DECREE OF THE JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. The ancestor of the appellees having obtained a judgment at law, in an action of covenant against Charles Jones and Charles Beeler, issued execution and levied on the interest of Charles Beeler of and in a tract of land, and sold that interest, became himself the purchaser, and received the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Broh v. Jenkins |
9 Mart.(o.s.) 526, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the parish and city of New-Orleans. |
|
Cases |
|
| Brown v. Compton |
10 Mart.(o.s.) 425, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the sixth district. |
|
Cases |
|
| Brown v. Shand |
1 McCord 409, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1821) |
1821 |
There is no precise form of words necessary for a will of personal pro perty, but whatever form be adopted, it must always be made to appear that the intention of the testator was fixed and determined. |
|
Cases |
|
| Butler v. Delaplaine |
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (January 01, 1821) |
1821 |
CHARGE OF THE COURT.--We are requested by the counsel of the plaintiffs to charge the jury, that if they believe Charity, the mother of Harriet and Sophia, resided in the state of Pennsylvania, for the period of six months in the years 1788 and 1789, with the consent or connivance of Norman Bruce, her master, or with the consent or connivance of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Case of Jones |
2 Del.Cas. 622 (July 14, 1821) |
1821 |
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 |
|
| Chiapella v. Lanusse's Syndics |
10 Mart.(o.s.) 448, Supreme Court of Louisiana (December 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the first district. |
|
Cases |
|
| CLAIM OF CHARLOTTE THORNTON. |
1 U.S. Op. Atty. Gen. 494 (October 31, 1821) |
1821 |
|
|
Administrative Decisions & Guidance |
|
| Clay v. Hopkins |
3 A.K.Marsh. 485, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (June 07, 1821) |
1821 |
ON CROSS APPEALS TO REVERSE A DECREE OF THE FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT. Samuel and Robert Purviance being the proprietors of a large quantity of land, in Henderson's grant, conveyed it, in trust, to Samuel Moale. He sold it to Henry Purviance for $100,000, who mortgaged it to Moale to secure the payment of the purchase money. To foreclose this mortgage... |
|
Cases |
|
| Cohen v. Hume |
1 McCord 439, Constitutional Court of Appeals of South Carolina (May 01, 1821) |
1821 |
A ferry-man is liable as a common carrier; and as soon as a carriage is fairly on the slip or drop of a flat, though driven by the servant of the owner of the carriage, it is in the ferryman's possession; and he will be liable for any damage which may afterwards occur to it or the horses. The carriage and horses, injured, of a person so passing a... |
|
Cases |
|
| Cohens v. State of Virginia |
19 U.S. 264, Supreme Court of the United States (March 03, 1821) |
1821 |
This Court has, constitutionally, appellate jurisdiction under the judiciary act of 1789, c. 20. s. 25. from the final judgment or decree of the highest Court of law or equity of a State, having jurisdiction of the subject matter of the suit, where is drawn in question the validity of a treaty, or statute of, or an authority exercised under, the... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
| CONCERNING THE IMPRISONMENT OF CAPTAIN BELL. |
5 U.S. Op. Atty. Gen. 742 (November 05, 1821) |
1821 |
|
|
Administrative Decisions & Guidance |
|
| Cook v. Rogers |
2 Del.Cas. 625, Court of Chancery of Delaware (July 24, 1821) |
1821 |
Bill in chancery. Mr. Robinson reads the bill. January 27, 1806, will of Dr. Rogers. Mr. Wells reads the answers of James Rogers and Thomas W. Rogers. This bill went on leave to amend the bill by making other persons parties defendants, and an order to file accounts. |
|
Cases |
|
| Cook v. Rogers |
2 Del.Cas. 625 (July 24, 1821) |
1821 |
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 |
|
| Denby v. Hairston |
1 Hawks 315, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Every principle of Law and every dictate of justice, combine to entitle the Plaintiff to the full value of the wheat and rye taken by the Defendant, and to compensation for the other injuries done by him. No ground is perceived in which the verdict is exceptionable, for the Defendant refused permission to the Plaintiff to enter for the purpose of... |
|
Cases |
|
| Douglass v. Stephens |
1 Del.Ch. 465, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Delaware (June 01, 1821) |
1821 |
History, objects and construction of the 2d Sec. 4th Art. of the Constitution of the United States, providing that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States. William S. Douglass, the intestate, a citizen of the State of Delaware, became bound by his bill obligatory, dated the... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
| Dromgoole v. Gardner |
10 Mart.(o.s.) 433, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the sixth district. |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision is no longer good law for at least one of the points it contains. |
| Dunbar v. Nichols |
10 Mart.(o.s.) 184, Supreme Court of Louisiana (July 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the first district. |
|
Cases |
|
| Dussuau v. Rilieux |
9 Mart.(o.s.) 318, Supreme Court of Louisiana (March 01, 1821) |
1821 |
Appeal from the court of the first district. |
|
Cases |
|