Legal Opinion
Hankey v. Downey
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided October 13, 1888No. 14,424PublishedCited by 16 opinions
From the Howard Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
Our decisions affirm that the statute requiring vendors of rights secured by letters-patent to file with the county clerk copies of the letters, and to make an affidavit that the letters are genuine, and requiring, also, that promissory notes given for such rights shall contain the words “given for a patent-right,” is valid. Fry v. State, 63 Ind. 552; Toledo Agricultural Works v. Work, 70 Ind. 253; Brechbill v. Randall, 102 Ind. 528; Central Union Tel. Co. v. Bradbury, 106 Ind. 1; Hockett v. State, 105 Ind. 250; New v. Walker, 108 Ind. 365.
From these decisions we do not depart, but we do not…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Patterson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Webber v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Stevens v. GladdingSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Stephens v. CadySupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- Hockett v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Sandage v. Studabaker Bros. Manufacturing Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1895
- Reeves v. CorningU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1892
- Hankey v. DowneyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892
- Woods v. CarlSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- First National Bank v. BeachIndiana Court of Appeals · 1904
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.