Doe v. Mayor, Alderman, and Common Council of Mobile
Supreme Court of the United States
This case was brought up* from the Supreme Court of Alabama, by a writ of error, issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act. It .Was a branch of the preceding case of the same plaintiff against Eslava. In the statement of that case, it is mentioned that the suit was brought against all the defendants conjointly, but that the city of Mobile obtained leave to sever in their plea. This case, is the result of that severance.
Read the full summary
This case was brought up* from the Supreme Court of Alabama, by a writ of error, issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act. It .Was a branch of the preceding case of the same plaintiff against Eslava. In the statement of that case, it is mentioned that the suit was brought against all the defendants conjointly, but that the city of Mobile obtained leave to sever in their plea. This case, is the result of that severance. The title of the plaintiff is set forth in extenso in the report of the preceding case, and need not be-here repeated.' The defendants, produced no official…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woodbury
The original action in this case was ejectment for part of a lot of land situated in the city of Mobile.
The plaintiff contended, that the piéce in controversy belonged to the tract which he claimed in the preceding case against Eslava, and to which he had the evidence of title shown there under a French grant in 1757, confirmed by an act of Congress of May 8, 1822, and a quitclaim patent for it issuing November 14, 1837. On the contrary, the city contended, that this piece belonged to what was termed the bakehouse lot, and into which it entered in 1824, under a grant from the United States by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Preston's Heirs v. BowmarSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Holmes and Others v. Trout and OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
- Bates v. TymasonNew York Supreme Court · 1835
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bushnell v. Crooke Mining & Smelting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Telluride Power Transmission Co. v. Rio Grande Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Shellenbarger v. FewelSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Ableman v. BoothWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Ord Land Co. v. Alamitos Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1926