Category: 1879

101 U.S. 591 101 U.S. 591 101 U.S. 591 25 L.Ed. 1028 HOLLINGSWORTHv.FLINT. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Texas. This was an action of trespass to try the title to certain lands in Texas, brought by Thomas J. Hollingsworth against John T. Flint […]

101 U.S. 597 101 U.S. 597 101 U.S. 597 25 L.Ed. 1019 BECHTELv.UNITED STATES. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. Edward Salomon for the plaintiffs in error. Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Smith, […]

101 U.S. 601 101 U.S. 601 101 U.S. 601 25 L.Ed. 1070 CRAMPTONv.ZABRISKIE. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey. ‘The Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Hudson,’ in the State of New Jersey, adopted, Dec. 14, 1876, a resolution for the […]

101 U.S. 610 101 U.S. 610 101 U.S. 610 25 L.Ed. 847 BIBLE SOCIETYv.GROVE. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Missouri. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. George P. Strong for the plaintiff in error. Mr. L. Danford, contra. […]

101 U.S. 569 101 U.S. 569 101 U.S. 569 25 L.Ed. 791 UNITED STATESv.DAWSON. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Maryland. The Attorney-General for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Joseph H. Bradley, contra. MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. 1 This was […]

101 U.S. 572 101 U.S. 572 101 U.S. 572 25 L.Ed. 923 COWDREYv.VANDENBURGH. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. This was a bill in equity, filed by J. W. V. Vandenburgh, H. L. Crawford, and L. S. Filbert, trading as J. W. V. Vandenburgh & Co., against Rudolph […]

101 U.S. 557 101 U.S. 557 101 U.S. 557 25 L.Ed. 892 SHAWv.RAILROAD COMPANY. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This is an action of replevin brought by the Merchants’ National Bank of St. Louis, Missouri, against Shaw & Esrey, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, […]

101 U.S. 567 101 U.S. 567 101 U.S. 567 25 L.Ed. 815 NATIONAL BANKv.CARPENTER. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Indiana. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. Andrew L. Robinson and Mr. Asa Iglehart for the appellant. Mr. Charles Denby […]

101 U.S. 543 101 U.S. 543 101 U.S. 543 25 L.Ed. 1068 RAILROAD COMPANYv.UNITED STATES. October Term, 1879 1 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. 2 This is an action by the United States against the Western Union Railroad Company, a corporation of Wisconsin, to recover […]

101 U.S. 551 101 U.S. 551 101 U.S. 551 25 L.Ed. 1026 NOUGU Ev.CLAPP. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. Bentinck Egan for the appellant. Mr. Philip Phillips, contra. MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered […]

101 U.S. 555 101 U.S. 555 101 U.S. 555 25 L.Ed. 961 DURANTv.ESSEX COMPANY. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Mass chusetts. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. E. F. Hodges for the appellant. The court declined to hear counsel […]

101 U.S. 514 101 U.S. 514 101 U.S. 514 25 L.Ed. 929 VANCEv.BURBANK. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. This is a suit in equity commenced on the 24th of December, 1877. The case made by the bill is as follows:—— On the 20th […]

101 U.S. 522 101 U.S. 522 101 U.S. 522 25 L.Ed. 792 CANAL COMPANYv.RAY. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. Richard T. Merrick for the appellant. Mr. Walter D. Davidge for the appellee. MR. JUSTICE STRONG delivered […]

101 U.S. 528 101 U.S. 528 101 U.S. 528 25 L.Ed. 912 RAILWAY COMPANYv.PHILADELPHIA. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Pennsylvania. This was an action brought in the Court of Common Pleas, No. 2, for the county of Philadelphia, by the city of Philadelphia against the Union Passenger Railway […]

101 U.S. 541 101 U.S. 541 101 U.S. 541 25 L.Ed. 944 LOVELLv.DAVIS. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana. This action was brought against Lovell & Bailey on a charter-party entered into by them March 14, 1871, for a voyage of the American ship […]

101 U.S. 479 101 U.S. 479 101 U.S. 479 25 L.Ed. 939 PLANING-MACHINE COMPANYv.KEITH. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Submitted by Mr. A. A. Stout, Mr. Charles M. Reed, and Mr. J. A. […]

101 U.S. 494 101 U.S. 494 101 U.S. 494 25 L.Ed. 1065 BAKERv.HUMPHREY. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Michigan. This was a bill filed by Sandford Baker against George P. Humphrey, Hiram D. Hurd, Charles A. Hurd, and David Smith, to have the […]

101 U.S. 503 101 U.S. 503 101 U.S. 503 25 L.Ed. 829 HALLv.RUSSELL. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. William W. Chapman and Mr. Timothy D. Lincoln for the appellants. Mr. George H. […]

101 U.S. 51 101 U.S. 51 101 U.S. 51 25 L.Ed. 993 MANUFACTURING COMPANYv.TRAINER. October Term, 1879 APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. George M. Dallas and Mr. James E. Gowen for the appellant. Mr. […]

101 U.S. 473 101 U.S. 473 101 U.S. 473 25 L.Ed. 800 MARQUEZv.FRISBIE. October Term, 1879 ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of California. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The case was argued by Mr. Richard T. Merrick for the plaintiff in error. No counsel appeared for the […]