| Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
| McDaniel v. Insall |
7 La. 241, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| McGrew v. Hart |
1 Port. 175, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
Error from Marengo Circuit Court--Before the Hon. H. W. COLLIER. This case came before the court on a bill of exceptions, which disclosed the following facts. On the twenty-ninth day of March, 1830, an execution was issued from the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court of Greene county, in favor of Benjamin Hart, against the property of James L.... |
|
Cases |
|
| McKain v. Love |
2 Hill (SC) 506, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (December 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The affidavits submitted in support of the motion, make out substantially the case stated. Upon an enquiry made in the jury room as to the character of a female witness who had been sworn for the plaintiff, one of them (George M. Perry) stated that he had understood she was the kept mistress of the plaintiff, and Perry himself swears... |
|
Cases |
|
| McLure v. Vernon |
2 Hill (SC) 420, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
This is evidently a mere formal defect, which could only be taken advantage of by special demurrer, under the statutes 27 Eliz. c. 5, and 4 Ann, c. 16, and which would be cured by a verdict. It is said in Chitty's Treatise on Pleading, vol. 1, p. 257: But when the plaintiff's name has by mistake been inserted in place of the defendant's, or... |
|
Cases |
|
| McManus' Syndic v. Jewett |
6 La. 530, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW ORLEANS. |
|
Cases |
|
| McMeekin v. Johnson |
2 Dana 459, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (November 13, 1834) |
1834 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR SCOTT COUNTY. This writ of error is prosecuted to reverse a judgment of the Scott circuit court, for one hundred and forty-four dollars and fifty cents, rendered upon an attachment; which was issued against the plaintiff in error, as an absconding debtor, by a justice of the peace of Scott county, directed to the sheriff... |
|
Cases |
|
| Metcalf v. Watkins |
1 Port. 57, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
Error from the County Court of Madison County. This was an action on a bill of exchange, instituted by Watkins the holder, against Metcalf the drawer. In the action below, the defendant Metcalf plead, First--That the bill was drawn by him for the accommodation of one Roberts, without any consideration on his part, but to enable the said Roberts to... |
|
Cases |
|
| Miller v. Irvine |
1 Dev. & Bat. 103, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The question presented in this case is, whether the consideration on which a written parol promise is founded, must appear in the instrument itself or in some other writing, or may be proved viva voce. At the common law, every agreement not under seal requires a consideration to support it; but the consideration might be proved in any manner in the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Moore v. Collins |
4 Dev. 384, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
Where the bargainor having signed and sealed a deed, said to the attesting witness I acknowledge that to be my act and deed. It was held that these words being addressed to one who was not intended to take possession of the deed, did not amount to a delivery. And where after the deed was thus executed, the agent of the bargainee... |
|
Cases |
|
| Moore v. Gibson |
6 La. 155, Supreme Court of Louisiana (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SECOND DISTRICT. |
|
Cases |
|
| Mulheran's Ex'rs v. Gillespie |
12 Wend. 349, Supreme Court of Judicature of New York (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
A judgment for costs in a suit against executors is not erroneous, although it does not appear on the face of the record that the costs were specially awarded by the court, and a direction given whether they should be levied de bonis propriis or de bonis testatoris. A mere request to a party to become the surety of a third person in respect to the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Mulheran's Ex'rs v. Gillespie |
12 Wend. 349 (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
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 |
|
| Murphy v. Higginbottom |
2 Hill (SC) 397, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (May 01, 1834) |
1834 |
Like the presiding judge below, I have been much disposed to sustain this action; but on reflection, I am satisfied that it cannot be done without an unprecedented violation of fixed principles. The general and well established legal rule is, that there is no implied warranty of title at a sheriff's sale; the interest of the defendant is alone... |
|
Cases |
|
| Myers v. Slack |
6 La. 136, Supreme Court of Louisiana (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE FOURTH DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SECOND PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Neal v. President and Trustees of East Tennessee College |
14 Tenn. 190, Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee (March 01, 1834) |
1834 |
Whether the act of limitations of 1819, ch. 28, ยง 2, operates in bar of a claim to land before an entry is made on the warrant, depends on the nature of the complainant's title, and his right to sue in law or equity to enforce his claim. Much confusion and not a little perplexity has prevailed among members of the legal profession, and with the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Niblett v. White's Heirs |
7 La. 253, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Ormond v. Gibbs |
4 Dev. 504, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
We approve of the construction put upon this will by the Judge who tried the cause. The expression, his part, embraces perhaps literally by reason of the words added of all that is willed to him, the whole property bequeathed to the legatees respectively, in the former part of the will, as well as that given in the residuary clause. But... |
|
Cases |
|
| Parker v. Parker's Creditors |
2 Hill Eq. 35, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (April 01, 1834) |
1834 |
In this case, the Master has made a report, which states the questions clearly, to which the solicitors on the part of the creditors of Isaac Parker have filed exceptions. The following is the report of the Master: That in the distribution of the funds in this case, a question arises as to a claim on the part of Col. Drayton, under the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Patin v. Prejean |
7 La. 301, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Peay v. Fleming |
2 Hill Eq. 97, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (December 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The first part of this case relates to the appeal on the part of the plaintiff, he contends that he is not liable for the price of a horse sold by him as administrator, to a man of the name of M'Sherry. The facts appear to be, that at the sale of his intestate's estate, the plaintiff sold the horse for seventy dollars on the usual term of note and... |
|
Cases |
|
| People v. Enoch |
13 Wend. 159, Court for the Correction of Errors of New York (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
Under the provisions of the revised statutes relative to homicide, the indictment for murder may be in the common law form, charging the offence to have been committed feloniously, wilfully, and of malice aforethought, instead of charging it to have been perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed; but the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Perry v. Craig |
3 Mo. 516, Supreme Court of Missouri (October 01, 1834) |
1834 |
In the year 1827, Craig brought a bill in chancery against James F. Perry and wife in the Circuit Court of Washington county. The substance of the bill is, that in the year 1810, some time in the spring of the year, he had occasion to borrow the sum of five hundred dollars, and that he applied to James Bryan, who then lived in the now limits of the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Perry v. Maxwell |
2 Dev.Eq. 488, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The bill is filed by the surviving executor of the will of S. Outerbridge, against the next of kin, and some of the legatees of the testator and against the executrix of J. Maxwell, deceased, who was also one of the executors of Outerbridge. The object of it is to have the construction of the will in several particulars settled and also to be... |
|
Cases |
|
| Price v. Nesbit |
1 Hill Eq. 445, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
When the Court has finally acted on a case and the rights of parties are fixed, the decree will not be disturbed; but as long as the Court has possession of a case it is a right which it claims for itself to correct any error into which it has fallen. Regularly no case should be brought before this Court until it is finally disposed of on the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Psyche v. Paradol |
6 La. 366, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE PARISH COURT, OF THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. |
|
Cases |
|
| Pulliam v. Winston |
5 Leigh 324, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (April 01, 1834) |
1834 |
(Absent Brooke and Brockenbrough, J.) A bond taken by an adm'r for proceeds of his sales of his intestate's estate, is to be looked upon, in equity, as the property of the estate; at least, until the adm'r's accounts are settled, and he is found in advance to the estate. An obligor in such a bond, cannot set-off debts due him from the adm'r... |
|
Cases |
|
| Randall v. Henry |
5 Stew. & P. 367, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
James Randall declared in Pickens Circuit Court, in trespass on the case for malicious prosecution, against Robert Henry. The declaration consisted of four counts,--setting out, First--(After the usual inducements)--that the defendant contriving and maliciously intending to injure the plaintiff in his good name, fame and credit, and to bring him... |
|
Cases |
|
| Raspillier v. Brownson |
7 La. 231, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SIXTH PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Reeves v. Dougherty |
15 Tenn. 222, Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee (August 01, 1834) |
1834 |
To give an account of the receipt of notes, money, etc., Mrs. Ewing pleads the statute of limitations. The principal question is, does it apply in cases where the possession has been acquired by fraud? This is the well-settled rule at law. Cocke and Jack v. McGinnis, Mar. & Yer. 361; Porter's Lessee v. Cocke, Peck, 41. Generally, not to say in all... |
|
Cases |
|
| Rives v. McLosky |
5 Stew. & P. 330, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
This action was assumpsit, by M'Losky & Hogan, against Rives & Mather, in Mobile Circuit Court. The cause of action was a note of hand, drawn by the defendants in favor of the plaintiffs, (below,) dated the twenty-first day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, and payable at ninety days, in the sum of eight hundred and twenty-two... |
|
Cases |
|
| Robertson v. Kennedy |
2 Dana 430, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (November 11, 1834) |
1834 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MEADE COUNTY. Robertson and Co. sued Kennedy, in case, for the loss of a hogshead of sugar, which he, as a common carrier, had undertaken, for a reasonable compensation, to carry from the bank of the river, to their store in Brandenburg. Common carriers are accountable for the goods which they undertake to carry, unless... |
|
Cases |
|
| Robertson v. Wurdeman |
2 Hill (SC) 324, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (April 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The only question before us relates to the instruction of the presiding judge with respect to the statute of limitations. On this point we are of opinion that a new trial must be granted. The provision of the statute of 1712 is very express, that persons who are under the age of twenty-one years, shall be allowed to bring their actions at any time... |
|
Cases |
|
| Robin v. Castille |
7 La. 292, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Rose v. Mynatt |
15 Tenn. 30, Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee (July 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The facts disclosed in the answer of Mynatt constitute the only ground upon which this court can decree for the complainant; it will, therefore, be useful to recapitulate the most prominent of them. From the statements of the answer it appears that a bill had been filed by the distributees of the estate of John Harrison, deceased, against Rose, the... |
|
Cases |
|
| Rowlett v. Rowlett's Ex'rs |
5 Leigh 20, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (January 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The first question is, to whom the surplus of the interest of the pecuniary fund of 2531 dollars belonged? to the testator's sister Mary Rowlett? to the residuary legatee, Martha? or to the three children Archer, Polly and Martha, to the education of whom the testator directed the interest of the fund to be appropriated? The circuit superiour court... |
|
Cases |
|
| Salnave v. McDonough's Ex'r |
6 La. 357, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES, FOR THE PARISH AND CITY OF NEW-ORLEANS. |
|
Cases |
|
| Shaw's Devisees v. Shaw's Adm'r |
2 Dana 341, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 28, 1834) |
1834 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY. Statement of the case. Samuel E. Shaw died possessed of some real estate and personalty, to the amount of about four thousand dollars. By his will, he directed, that all the property he had received by his wife, should be restored to her, and that his executors should purchase for her a gig and harness... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
| Small v. Flint |
7 La. 352, Supreme Court of Louisiana (October 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Smith v. Corcoran |
7 La. 46, Supreme Court of Louisiana (August 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Smith v. Mabry |
15 Tenn. 26, Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee (July 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The authority to sue as an executor must appear of record--that is, the probate of the will, the qualification of the executor, and his admission to the office by the grant of letters testamentary must appear of record. What are letters testamentary, is the question. Lord Ellenborough, in the case of Eldon v. Kiddel, said that letters of... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Cantrell |
2 Hill (SC) 389, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (May 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The defendant is indicted under the 22 & 23 Ch. 2. c. 7, which is made of force in this State, and which provides inter alia that any person or persons who shall in the night time maliciously, unlawfully and willingly kill or destroy any horses, sheep or other cattle of any person or persons whatsoever, every such offence shall be adjudged felony,... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Cheatwood |
2 Hill (SC) 459, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (December 01, 1834) |
1834 |
The first ground of the motion in arrest of judgement is, because the indictment does not charge the crime in the words either of the act of 1740 or that of 1821. The words of the act of 1821 are exactly pursued, with the exception that instead of the words wilfully, deliberately and maliciously did murder, the... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. De Witt |
2 Hill (SC) 282, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (March 01, 1834) |
1834 |
We concur with the presiding judge, that the evidence of Harvey as to what Hartly swore on the former trial, was admissible in evidence. The rule that what a deceased witness has sworn on a former trial of the same case between the same parties may be received in evidence on a second trial, is a very familiar one, and of almost daily application.... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Gillis |
4 Dev. 606, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
To assist juries in complicated cases to arrive at a correct conclusion upon disputed facts, by advising them as to the nature, bearing and tendency of the proofs; but at the same time to withhold any intimation of an opinion as to the weight of the whole or any part of the testimony, is one of the arduous duties which the law enjoins upon Judges... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Hunt |
2 Hill (SC) 1, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (April 01, 1834) |
1834 |
In these cases, we have been called on to discharge the high trust committed to us by the State, of deciding upon the constitutionality of the acts of the Legislature. This is at all times a duty to be discharged cautiously and tenderly; but, at the same time, independently and fearlessly.At a time like the present, when the waves of popular... |
|
Cases |
|
| State v. Massey |
2 Hill (SC) 379, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
For all the purposes of these cases, it would be enough to say that as the objections to the jury, now urged for a new trial, were not taken on the Circuit Court, they cannot avail the defendants here. But as they present two questions arising out of the jury law, which we supposed to have been settled long ago, but which we find are still supposed... |
|
Cases |
|
| Stoker v. Leavenworth |
7 La. 390, Supreme Court of Louisiana (October 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
| Sumter v. Morse |
2 Hill Eq. 87, Court of Appeals of Law and Equity of South Carolina (June 01, 1834) |
1834 |
It appears by the statement of the defendant's counsel, that he called upon the plaintiff before the answers were filed, and enquired if he intended to urge the statute against the demands of the defendants; and stated that if he did not mean to rely upon the statute, the defendants would also waive it. That the plaintiff assented to this... |
|
Cases |
|
| Testamentary Ex'r of Lewis v. Casenave |
6 La. 437, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF NEW-ORLEANS. |
|
Cases |
|
| Towles' Adm'x v. Weeks |
7 La. 312, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1834) |
1834 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF ST. MARY. |
|
Cases |
|