Legal Opinion · Dissent

Barnes v. Irvine

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 15, 1836PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Dissent

Huston J.

Dissenting.—It has been often said, that the title to lands ought to be certain, and of course that points decided respecting such titles should be considered settled and sacred. Where such titles were acquired under legislative enactments, the party must comply with the requisitions of the law, or he acquired no title. It seemed settled that no one could disregard the provisions of the law, and in their place substitute what he supposed to be equivalents; but nothwithstanding all this, in point of fact, the time of courts in England and in the Dnited States, has been more occupied…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. The Commonwealth v. COXC, ESQ.Supreme Court of the United States · 1800
  2. Campbell v. GalbreathSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
  3. Rush v. BarrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
  4. Reed v. DickeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
  5. Huidekoper's Lessee v. DouglassSupreme Court of the United States · 1805

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Wilson v. HornerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API