Green v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
In error to the Circuit Court for the Southern District of Ohio. This was an action of debt brought by the United States against one Green, and the sureties on his official bond, as agent for paying pensions at Cincinnati. Seven sureties wore named in the bond, all of whom executed it.
Read the full summary
In error to the Circuit Court for the Southern District of Ohio. This was an action of debt brought by the United States against one Green, and the sureties on his official bond, as agent for paying pensions at Cincinnati. Seven sureties wore named in the bond, all of whom executed it. The defendants charged as sureties, besides filing a joint plea of non est factum, each filed separate special pleas, first, to the effect that they signed the writing whilst the same was in blank, as to the names of the obligors, at the request of the principal, Green, upon the assurance and agreement that it…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bradley
We see no reason why these acts should not be applied to trials in which the United States are a party, as well as those between private persons. The express exception of executors, administrators, and guardians would seem, by necessary inference, to leave all other suitors under the operation of the law. It is urged that the government is not bound by a law unless expressly named. We do not see why this rule of construction should apply to acts of legislation which lay down general rules of procedure in civil actions. The very fact that it is confined to civil actions would seem to show that…
2Cited by20 opinions
- United States v. United Mine Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Logan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Fink v. O'NeilSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Pittsburg v. Sterrett Subdistrict SchoolSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- United States v. Lee HuenDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1902
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.