Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 72774 of about 728,175 results (2.073 seconds)

1802

Attorney General Vs. Grantees

Court : US Supreme Court

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. GRANTEES - 4 U.S. 237 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court ATTORNEY GENERAL v. GRANTEES, 4 U.S. 237 (1802) 4 U.S. 237 (Dall.) Attorney-General v. The Grantees under the act of April 1792 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. September Term, 1802 ON the 2d of April 1802, an act of the general assembly was passed, entitled 'An Act to settle the controversies arising from contending claims to land, within that part of the territory of this commonwealth north and west of the rivers Ohio and Alleghany, and Conewango creek,' (5 State Laws, 153.) by which the Judges of the Supreme Court were directed to devise an issue, for trying the following questions, at Sunbury, in Northumberland county: 1st. Are warrants heretofore granted under the act of the 3d of April 1792, valid and effectual in law against this commonwealth, so as to bar this commonwealth from granting the same land to other applicants under the act aforesaid, in cases where the warrantees have not fully and fairly co...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

Jones Vs. Insurance Co of North America

Court : US Supreme Court

JONES v. INSURANCE CO OF NORTH AMERICA - 4 U.S. 246 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court JONES v. INSURANCE CO OF NORTH AMERICA, 4 U.S. 246 (1802) 4 U.S. 246 (Dall.) Jones et al. v. The Insurance Company of North-America. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1802 COVENANT, on a policy of insurance, dated the 30th of November 1792, upon the freight of the brig, called the Benjamin Franklin, valued at 3000 dollars, for a voyage 'at and from Bourdeaux to a port in the United States,' against 'the seas, &c.; arrests, restraints, detainments of all kings, &c.;' in the usual terms of the printed policies. The premium was six per cent.; and, it was declared, 'that this insurance is made on the freight of the above brig, valued at the sum insured, for two thirds thereof, &c.;' On the evidence, it appeared, that the brig sailed from Bourdeax on the 17th day of November 1792, bound for Philadelphia; but, on the 20th of November, before she had reached the mouth of the Garonn...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

Cochran Vs. Cummings

Court : US Supreme Court

COCHRAN v. CUMMINGS - 4 U.S. 250 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court COCHRAN v. CUMMINGS, 4 U.S. 250 (1802) 4 U.S. 250 (Dall.) Cochran et al. v. Cummings. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1802 CASE, for goods sold and delivered. There was a special defence, that the defendant had sold, and conveyed to the plaintiffs, a quantity of land in the county of Northumberland, in satisfaction of their demand; and the deed of conveyance, dated in June 1799, was produced. But the plaintiffs insisted, 1st. That they took the conveyance only as a collateral security: and, 2dly. That they were imposed upon by the defendant, as to the quality of the land. On the first point, the evidence was contradictory; and the COURT left it, implicitly, to be decided by the jury. On the second point, it was proved, that the defendant had represented the land as very valuable; saying, that it was such as would sell, in two or three years, for a price, from two to six dollars an acre: but, in fact, t...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

FiTZGERALD Vs. CALDWELL'S EX'RS

Court : US Supreme Court

FITZGERALD v. CALDWELL'S EX'RS - 4 U.S. 251 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court FITZGERALD v. CALDWELL'S EX'RS, 4 U.S. 251 (1802) 4 U.S. 251 (Dall.) Fitzgerald v. Caldwell's Executors. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1802 THE original cause being remitted to the Supreme Court, upon the decision of the High Court of Errors and Appeals,1 this scire facias was brought to enforce the judgment against Caldwell's executors, returnable to September term 1798; and issue was therein joined upon the plea of 'Payment.' To maintain the plea, the defendant's counsel recapitulated the facts set forth in the report of Fitzgerald v. Caldwell, 2 Dall. Rep. 215.; and contended, that, while the attachments were depending, Caldwell was not liable for interest; that as soon as the original question had been decided, upon the trial of one of the attachments, (in January 1793) favourably to the claim of the present plaintiff, Caldwell, at his own peril, paid the principal sum, due at the time ...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

Com. of Pennsylvania Vs. Gibbs

Court : US Supreme Court

COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GIBBS - 4 U.S. 253 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA v. GIBBS, 4 U.S. 253 (1802) 4 U.S. 253 (Dall.) The Commonwealth v. Gibbs. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1802 THIS was an indictment, on the 17th section of the election law (4 State Laws, p. 342. Dall. edit.) which provides (among other things) that 'if any officer of the election shall be threatened, or violence used to his person, or interrupted in the execution of his duty, every person who shall be guilty of such intimidation, threats, violence, or interruption, being convicted thereof, shall be fined and imprisoned for the same, at the discretion of the Court, not exceeding six months imprisonment, nor exceeding one hundred dollars fine.' The facts were briefly these: Mr. Beckley, the prosecutor, was appointed a judge, at the general election in October 1801. Mr. Gibbs, the father of the defendant, presented his ballot, but before accepting it, Mr. Beckley insisted,...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

Com. of Pennsylvania Vs. Franklin

Court : US Supreme Court

COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA v. FRANKLIN - 4 U.S. 255 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA v. FRANKLIN, 4 U.S. 255 (1802) 4 U.S. 255 (Dall.) The Commonwealth v. Franklin et al. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1802 IN August Session 1801, of the Court of Quarter Sessions, the grand jury of Luzerne county presented the following indictment: 'Luzerne county ss. 'The Grand Inquest for the body of the county of Luzerne, upon their oaths respectively do present, that John Franklin, Elisha Satterlee, and John Jenkins, all late of the said county, yeomen, on the first day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and one, at the county aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this Court, unlawfully did combine and conspire, for the purpose of conveying, possessing, and settling, on certain lands within the limits of the county aforesaid, under a certain pretended title not derived from the authority of this commonwealth, or of the late proprieta...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

U S Vs. Conyngham

Court : US Supreme Court

U S v. CONYNGHAM - 4 U.S. 358 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court U S v. CONYNGHAM, 4 U.S. 358 (1802) 4 U.S. 358 (Dall.) The United States v. Coyngham et al. Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District. May Term, 1802 THIS cause came before the Court, on a case stated for their opinion, in the following terms: 'At the term of September 1798, judgment was obtained in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, at the suit of John Travis et al. v. Francis and John West, for 1365l. 3s. 9d. debt. and 6d. costs. 'A fieri facias issued under the said judgment, returnable to December term 1798, under which certain goods and chattels,1 belonging to the defendants, were levied on and taken in execution, by the sheriff of the county of Philadelphia, on the 8th day of January 1799. 'The 8th of January 1799, the said John Travis and others, plaintiffs in the said action, for a full and valuable consideration, to them paid by the defendants in this action, assigned the judgment, and all the monies due thereon, ...

Tag this Judgment!

1802

Knox Vs. Greenleaf

Court : US Supreme Court

KNOX v. GREENLEAF - 4 U.S. 360 (1802) U.S. Supreme Court KNOX v. GREENLEAF, 4 U.S. 360 (1802) 4 U.S. 360 (Dall.) Knox et al. v. Greenleaf. Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District. May Term, 1802 CASE. The defendant filed the pollowing plea in abatement: 'The said James Greenleaf, who is impleaded by the addition and description of a citizen of the state of Maryland, by Jared Ingersoll, his attorney, comes and defends the force and injury, &c.; and says, that he, long before the arrest in the present action, and at the same time, as well as twelve months preceding the said arrest, and continually afterwards, was, and yet is, a citizen of the state of Pennsylvania, having his permanent domicil and residence in the said state, or district, of Pennsylvania, and not a citizen of the state of Maryland. And the said James Greenleaf, by his attorney aforesaid, further saith, that according to the constitution and laws of the United States, a citizen of Pennsylvania cannot be implea...

Tag this Judgment!

1801

Com. of Pennsylvania Vs. Addison

Court : US Supreme Court

COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ADDISON - 4 U.S. 225 (1801) U.S. Supreme Court COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ADDISON, 4 U.S. 225 (1801) 4 U.S. 225 (Dall.) Commonwealth v. Addison. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1801 THE attorney-general made a motion, for a rule to show cause, why an Information should not be granted against the defendant, the President of the Courts of Common Pleas, in the fifth circuit; on the affidavit of J. C. Lucas, an associate Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Alleghany county, stating that he had been wilfully prevented by Mr. Addison, from delivering his sentiments to the grand jury, after Mr. Addison, as President, had concluded his charge, &c.; In support of the motion, the attorney-general cited 1 Reeves. Hist. Eng. Law, 201. c. 4. 2 Ibid. 2. Jacob's L. Dict. tit. 'Chapitre.' 4 Bl. Com. 303. Const. Penn. art. 5. s. 4. 6 Mod. 96. But, by the COURT: We are, unanimously, of opinion, that the case does not present to our consideration an indi...

Tag this Judgment!

1801

Wainright Vs. Crawford

Court : US Supreme Court

WAINRIGHT v. CRAWFORD - 4 U.S. 226 (1801) U.S. Supreme Court WAINRIGHT v. CRAWFORD, 4 U.S. 226 (1801) 4 U.S. 226 (Dall.) Wainwright et al. v. Crawford. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1801 THIS was an action on the case, brought by foreign merchants, against the defendant, to recover the amount of money lent to the captain, to pay for disbursements in repairing, and supplying, his ship, in a foreign port. It was proved, by the evidence of the captain, that he had no funds belonging to his owner, or to himself; and that he borrowed the money from the plaintiffs, to make the necessary repairs of the ship, for the prosecution of her voyage. Moylan, for the defendant, observed, that the power of the master of a ship, extended no farther, than to authorise him to hypothecate the ship herself, in a foreign port, for absolute necessaries: but, he contended, that the master could not, under any circumstances, personally bind the owners. Moll. c. 1. 6. 2. s. 10. s. 14. Beauwe...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //