Bank of Columbia v. Sweeney
Supreme Court of the United States
THIS was a writ of error to the circuit court for the county of Washington. The same case was before this Court at January term 1828, on a motion for a mandamus, 1 Peters, 667. - Upon issue, being, joined in the circuit court ón the plea of the statute of limitations, that court decided,'that the defendant was entitled to avail himself of the statute against the’claims of the plaintiffs, proceeding under the provisions of their charter, which gives them summary process…
Read the full summary
THIS was a writ of error to the circuit court for the county of Washington. The same case was before this Court at January term 1828, on a motion for a mandamus, 1 Peters, 667. - Upon issue, being, joined in the circuit court ón the plea of the statute of limitations, that court decided,'that the defendant was entitled to avail himself of the statute against the’claims of the plaintiffs, proceeding under the provisions of their charter, which gives them summary process against their debtors. . - ' The 'case "Was submitted to this Court on a written argument by Mr Jones and -Mr Key. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr Chief'Justice Marshall,
delivered the opinion of the Court.
In 1793, the státe of Maryland passéd an act incorporating the hank of Columbia, which contains the following section: “ And, whereas it is-absehitely necessary that debts due to the said bank should be punctually paid,, to enable the directors to calculate with certainty and precision on meeting the demands that may be made upon them. Be it enacted, that whenever any person or persons are indebted to the said bank for ‘moneys borrowed by them, or . for bonds, bills or notes given or indorsed by them, with an express consent in…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Smith v. MorseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1852
- Langdeau v. United StatesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1962
- Guardia Piazza D'Oro, LLC v. Ellis-SandersDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2024