Hartshorne v. Sleght
New York Supreme Court
AT the last court, a writ of venire facias de novo was awarded in this cause, (2 Johns. Rep. 549.) At the last sittings in Nezv-Torh, the Chief Justice, before whom the. cause ^as tried, gave his opinion, that the paper- in question was a sea-letter, agreeably to the decision of this court> when the cause came before them, on a former writ of error.
Read the full summary
AT the last court, a writ of venire facias de novo was awarded in this cause, (2 Johns. Rep. 549.) At the last sittings in Nezv-Torh, the Chief Justice, before whom the. cause ^as tried, gave his opinion, that the paper- in question was a sea-letter, agreeably to the decision of this court> when the cause came before them, on a former writ of error. To this opinion, the counsel for the plaintiffs in error, tendered a bill of exceptions, It was objected, that afterthis question had been definitively settled, in the court ■ . ¿or the correction of errors, another bill of exceptions wou^ now…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
(After stating the facts and proceedings in the cause.) The parties have changed situations. The plaintiffs in the court below, having, on the former bill of exceptions, maintained the errors stated in their general assignment of errors in this court, the defendants below have now brought their writ of error. On this, they have made a special assignment of errors ; that by certain treaties of the United States with the French nation, the Dutch nation, and the Spanish nation, respectively made, (which nations were, on the 13th day of October, 1798, and before and after, at open…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Reitenbach v. ReitenbachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828
- Bernard v. VignaudSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1822
- Spinning v. Ohio Life Insurance & Trust Co.Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati · 1858
- Hayward v. BathSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1857