Title | Citation | Year | Summary | Most Relevant | Type | Status |
Thornton v. Mansker |
10 La. 121, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
Toler v. Pender |
1 Dev. & Bat.Eq. 445, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
We deem it unnecessary to comment upon the proofs, for upon the pleadings it appears to us clear, that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. There is no allegation in the bill, upon which we can examine the right of the defendant Boyd, to retain the reward of one hundred dollars, received for his alleged services. We cannot, as this bill is framed,... |
|
Cases |
|
Tucker v. Peeble's Curator |
10 La. 403, Supreme Court of Louisiana (October 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE FIFTH PRESlDING. |
|
Cases |
|
Turnbull v. Towle's Ex'x |
10 La. 254, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF ST. MARY. |
|
Cases |
|
Turner v. Armstrong |
17 Tenn. 412, Supreme Court of Tennessee (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
There are two distinct grounds upon which, we think, this judgment should not have been rendered. 1st. Although it has been determined by this court, solicitous to escape from the determination, that debts evidenced by negotiable paper are subject to the general laws relating to garnishments (Hightower v. Smith, 7 Yerg. 44, note), yet it is... |
|
Cases |
|
Tyrrell v. Morris |
1 Dev. & Bat.Eq. 559, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
The cause has been brought to a hearing only as against the defendant Morris, and the alleged purchaser under him. Whether the plaintiffs will ask for any relief against the executors we know not. Our decision on the case as heard, will not prejudice such an application if they should hereafter make it. The bill must be dismissed, and dismissed... |
|
Cases |
|
Tyson v. Lansing |
10 La. 444, Supreme Court of Louisiana (October 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE SEVENTH PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
U.S. v. Carter |
4 Cranch C.C. 732, Circuit Court, District of Columbia (October 01, 1836) |
1836 |
To an indictment at common law for assault and battery upon William Ball, a white man, the defendant, [George Carter,] by his counsel, Mr. Neale, filed the following plea:And the said George Carter in his own proper person comes and says that the said United States ought not, neither ought the judges of the United States for the... |
|
Cases |
|
U.S. v. Jeffers |
4 Cranch C.C. 704, Circuit Court, District of Columbia (March 01, 1836) |
1836 |
Francis S. Key, Esq., attorney of the United States, for the District of Columbia, having laid before the court a letter to him from the secretary of state, in these words: F. S. Key, Esq., United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Department of State, Washington, May 27, 1836. Sir, I transmit a copy of a communication from his... |
|
Cases |
|
U.S. v. Sibbald |
35 U.S. 313, Supreme Court of the United States (January 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL from the superior court of East Florida. This was a claim to land in East Florida, presented to the superior court of East Florida, by the appellee, founded on a concession for sixteen thousand acres of land, made by Don Jose Coppinger, governor of the province of East Florida, to Charles F. Sibbald, the claimant, on the 2d day of August... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Underwood v. Brockman |
4 Dana 309, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 05, 1836) |
1836 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR CHRISTIAN COUNTY. Sometime in the year 1810, Elizabeth L., daughter of William Brockman, of Virginia, against her father's advice, intermarried with Charles Bronaugh, a poor and rather prodigal young man, by trade a wheelwright; who, afterwards, in the fall of the same year, removed to Kentucky, in company with her... |
|
Cases |
|
Union Bank of Tennessee v. State |
17 Tenn. 490, Supreme Court of Tennessee (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
The questions presented for the consideration of the court in this cause are of much importance, involving, as they do, the taxing power of the state, the privileges of an incorporated institution, and the rights of non-resident owners of our bank stock; and they have well merited, and have received from us, a careful and patient investigation. In... |
|
Cases |
|
Vaughn v. State |
4 Mo. 290, Supreme Court of Missouri (April 01, 1836) |
1836 |
The plaintiffs in error were indicted for exercising the business of auctioneers, without license, contrary to the provisions of the statute. During the progress of the trial in the Circuit Court, various questions were raised and the opinion of the court thereon excepted to. The plaintiffs in error, were convicted on the indictment and (after... |
|
Cases |
|
Waddell v. Mordecai |
Ril. 17, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (January 01, 1836) |
1836 |
Tried before Judge EARLE, Charleston, May, 1835. Assumpsit to recover back money which had been paid to the defendant, on a contract which had not been performed, in January, 1834. The defendant, as agent of the brig Encomium, for which he was authorized to engage freight, entered into a contract with the agent of the plaintiff, to transport... |
|
Cases |
|
Waddell v. Mordecai |
3 Hill (SC) 22, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (January 01, 1836) |
1836 |
An agent must so disclose his principal at the time of the contract, as to enable the opposite party to have recourse to the principal, in case the agent had authority to bind him; but it is not necessary that the agent should name every one of a class or company of his principals, who are usually designated by some brief descriptive term; such a... |
|
Cases |
|
Wadsworth v. Armfield |
1 Dev. & Bat.Eq. 323, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1836) |
1836 |
The argument on the part of the defendants is, that under the will, a vested interest in Beck passed to the testator's daughter, Betsey; and that the issue of Beck, born since the vesting of that interest, accrued to the said daughter by operation of law. That the legacies charged upon that bequest are pecuniary legacies, the amount whereof is to... |
|
Cases |
|
Walker v. McConnico |
18 Tenn. 228, Supreme Court of Tennessee (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
In this case it is not questioned but that the decree of the chancellor in regard to the trust property is correct; but it is insisted, and we think with reason, that the decree against the defendant McConnico, as to the $2,000-note, is erroneous. The answer, in reply to the interrogatories of the bill, states that said note was executed without... |
|
Cases |
|
Ward v. Vass |
7 Leigh 135, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (February 01, 1836) |
1836 |
It has long been the settled rule of equity, that where there are principal debtor and surety, if the creditor, without the knowledge and consent of the surety, makes any contract with the principal, by which he ties up his hands from proceeding to recover his debt, or discharges any specific lien on the principal's property, out of which he might... |
|
Cases |
|
Weeks v. Flower |
9 La. 379, Supreme Court of Louisiana (April 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE EIGHTH PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
Wells v. Scott's Ex'x |
10 La. 399, Supreme Court of Louisiana (October 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PROBATES FOR THE PARISH OF RAPIDES. |
|
Cases |
|
Whittington v. Whittington |
2 Dev. & Bat. 64, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
A petition praying for a divorce a vinculo matrimonii only, will be dismissed, if the petitioner is not entitled to that relief, and upon being refused it, declines asking for any other; for a decree for a divorce a mensa et thoro, even in a proper case for it, will never be made by the court, unless at the instance of the party. Whether adultery... |
|
Cases |
|
Wilbourne v. Stead |
1 Rich. 466, Court of Appeals of Law of South Carolina (July 01, 1836) |
1836 |
*Appeal Court, July Term, 1836. |
|
Cases |
|
Wilcoxon v. Buford's Heirs |
10 La. 183, Supreme Court of Louisiana (September 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
Wilkinson v. Holloway |
7 Leigh 277, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (February 01, 1836) |
1836 |
An attorney at law employed to collect a debt may receive payment in money, but has no authority to accept any thing else in satisfaction. Therefore, where an attorney employed to collect a debt, discounts from it a debt he himself owes the debtor, and takes for the balance the debtor's assignment of a bond of third persons, the creditor is not... |
|
Cases |
|
Winn v. Twogood |
9 La. 422, Supreme Court of Louisiana (May 01, 1836) |
1836 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. |
|
Cases |
|
Wintermute v. Snyder |
3 N.J. Eq. 489, Court of Chancery of New Jersey (October 01, 1836) |
1836 |
A testator by his will gave and bequeathed to his wife his real estate, and so much of his personal as she might choose to take, to be held and enjoyed by her during her natural life. He then ordered, that after the death of his wife, his personal and real property should be sold and divided, two thirds to his own relations, and one third to his... |
|
Cases |
|
Wood v. Wood |
5 Paige Ch. 596, Chancery Court of New York (January 01, 1836) |
1836 |
The law of the testator's domicil governs the disposition of his personal estate, and his real estate which is situated where he is domiciled. And where the testator was a resident of the state of New York at the time of his death, and by his will directed his personal property, and the proceeds of his real estate there situate, to be invested in... |
|
Cases |
|
Woods v. McGavock |
18 Tenn. 133, Supreme Court of Tennessee (December 01, 1836) |
1836 |
This bill is brought to enforce a reconveyance of certain tracts of land, which were sold as the property of Samuel Wright under a deed of trust, which land was purchased by the defendants and is sought to be redeemed by the complainants, who claim the right to do so because, they say, they are bona fide creditors of said Wright, and have tendered... |
|
Cases |
|
Woolfolk v. Woolfolk |
4 Dana 535, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 27, 1836) |
1836 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR WOODFORD COUNTY. Sowell Woolfolk, father of the parties to this suit, and who died in Woodford county in 1830, possessed of upwards of five hundred acres of land and other property, had published two papers, each purporting to be his last will; in the first, among other legacies and devises to others, he devised to the... |
|
Cases |
|
Wren v. Gayden |
1 Howard 365, High Court of Errors and Appeals of Mississippi (January 01, 1836) |
1836 |
Where A administered upon an estate and became guardian for several of the minor heirs, executing separate guardian bonds, and the heirs filed a bill in equity against him as administrator and guardian: Held, that A's liabilities as guardian were separate and independent; and that he could not be pursued in the same suit in the double capacity of... |
|
Cases |
|
Alexander v. Fitzpatrick |
4 Port. 405, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1837) |
1837 |
In error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery county. |
|
Cases |
|
Amy v. Ramsey |
4 Mo. 505, Supreme Court of Missouri (May 01, 1837) |
1837 |
The first instruction calls on the court to say the bill of sale is void. The court did right to refuse this on the ground that the proposition involved the whole question in dispute, and there was not a state of evidence to justify the court to declare the law to be so. The second instruction asked, assumes the ground that if the bill of sale was... |
|
Cases |
|
Anderson v. Woodford |
8 Leigh 316, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia (April 01, 1837) |
1837 |
The agreement filed in this case admits of no doubt as to the exemption of Anderson from interest until the incumbrances were all removed; and the decree having given interest from a date long anteriour, the appellant has been injured, and his adversaries have recovered some hundreds of dollars to which they have no title. The case then, upon the... |
|
Cases |
|
Arnous v. Lesassier |
10 La. 592, Supreme Court of Louisiana (February 01, 1837) |
1837 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE THEREOF PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
Baker v. Welch |
4 Mo. 484, Supreme Court of Missouri (May 01, 1837) |
1837 |
The first point for the complainant is, that on the evidence, the decree should have been for him. Second. That the Circuit Court for the county of Clay erred in admitting the deposition of Elizabeth Welch, the widow of the intestate, who was the wife of the deceased, at the time the transaction occurred of which she speaks. When this case was... |
|
Cases |
|
Bank of Alabama v. McDade |
4 Port. 252, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1837) |
1837 |
In error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery. |
|
Cases |
|
Bank of U.S. v. Lee |
5 Cranch C.C. 319, Circuit Court, District of Columbia (November 01, 1837) |
1837 |
In equity. The bill in this case was filed by the Bank of the United States against Elizabeth Lee, widow of R. B. Lee, deceased, Edmund J. Lee, surviving trustee under a deed of trust for the separate use of Mrs. Lee, and Richard Smith, a trustee under a deed from R. B. Lee, to secure his debt to the Bank of the United States. The object of the... |
|
Cases |
|
Banks v. McCarty |
5 Mo. 1, Supreme Court of Missouri (September 01, 1837) |
1837 |
In March, 1836, Banks and wife filed their bill in chancery, in the Circuit Court of Lafayette county, setting forth that some time about the year 1818, in the county of Sumner, in the State of Tennessee, one William McCarty died intestate, leaving a widow, Mary McCarty, and also six daughters; his legal heirs, &c. The bill also shows that since... |
|
Cases |
|
Baylor v. McGregor |
5 Port. 103, Supreme Court of Alabama (January 01, 1837) |
1837 |
In error to the Circuit Court of Jefferson. |
|
Cases |
|
Beeler v. Hill's Ex'r |
5 Dana 37, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (April 05, 1837) |
1837 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR NELSON COUNTY. Statement of the case. This bill was filed by a portion of the heirs of Atkinson Hill, deceased, against his executor, Wilford Lee, and the remaining heirs, for the purpose of coercing a settlement and distribution of the decedent's estate. The executor sets up a partial settlement made with the County... |
|
Cases |
|
Bennett v. Com. |
8 Leigh 745, General Court of Virginia (December 01, 1837) |
1837 |
Case in which a conviction of murder in the first degree was held to be well warranted by the evidence. After a verdict of guilty on an indictment for murder, prisoner makes affidavit that T. C. is a material witness for him in the prosecution; that he was not summoned to attend the trial, because prisoner was not then informed that he knew... |
|
Cases |
|
Bertrand v. Frazier |
11 La. 236, Supreme Court of Louisiana (June 01, 1837) |
1837 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT. |
|
Cases |
|
Bethell v. Moore |
2 Dev. & Bat. 311, Supreme Court of North Carolina (June 01, 1837) |
1837 |
The act of 1789, (Rev. c. 308,) requiring a will, when contested, to be proved by all the attesting wituesses, if to be found, is satisfied by proof of their handwriting, if they are out of the state, lunatic, or the like. Where there are three attesting witnesses to a will, all of whom reside beyond the limits of the state, proof of the... |
|
Cases |
|
Bethell's Ex'x v. Wilson |
1 Dev. & Bat.Eq. 610, Supreme Court of North Carolina (December 01, 1837) |
1837 |
All the residuary legatees are necessary parties to a bill seeking to subject the share of one of them to a debt; especially when the interest of each legatee is uncertain, depending upon the amount of advancements made them in the lifetime of the testator. A creditor cannot obtain the aid of a Court of Equity to procure satisfaction of his debt... |
|
Cases |
|
Bettis v. Taylor |
6 Port. 333, Supreme Court of Alabama (June 01, 1837) |
1837 |
Error to the circuit court of Mobile county. |
|
Cases |
|
Birney v. Richardson |
5 Dana 424, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 08, 1837) |
1837 |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MERCER COUNTY. This appeal is prosecuted for reversing a judgment in detinue, obtained by the appellees, Landie Richardson and Elizabeth Ford, as the surviving legatees of Thomas Richardson, their deceased father, against James Birney, the surviving husband of one of the deceased co-legatees, whom he married, in the year... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |
Bissell v. Erwin's Heirs |
10 La. 524, Supreme Court of Louisiana (February 01, 1837) |
1837 |
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, THE JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT PRESIDING. |
|
Cases |
|
Black v. Hair |
2 Hill Eq. 622, Court of Appeals of Equity of South Carolina (May 01, 1837) |
1837 |
A majority of the Court is of opinion that the plaintiff's appeal cannot be sustained. The opinion of the Court (in which, to avoid being misconceived, I state that I do not concur) is, that a mortgagee of personalty does not fall within the principle which prevents a trustee to sell from buying at his own sale. It is my province to state the... |
|
Cases |
|
Blackerby v. Holton |
5 Dana 520, Court of Appeals of Kentucky (October 16, 1837) |
1837 |
Three cases in this Court, upon several decrees rendered in one suit in Chancery, in Bracken Circuit Court: Abner Holton and wife brought a suit in chancery against John M. Blackerby, the administrator of Jeduthun Blackerby, deceased, for a settlement and distribution of the estate of the deceased, among his five heirs and distributees; of whom... |
|
Cases |
|
Bloodgood v. Mohawk & H.R.R. Co. |
18 Wend. 9, Court for the Correction of Errors of New York (January 01, 1837) |
1837 |
Acts of the legislature authorizing Railroad Companies to enter upon, take possession of and use the lands and real estate of individuals for the construction and maintenance of their roads, as far forth as the same are indispensably necessary for that purpose, are valid and constitutional acts; provided, that in and by the same acts, provision is... |
|
Cases |
The case or administrative decision has some negative history, but has not been reversed or overruled. |