Vanderheyden v. Young
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trespass, assault and battery, and false imprisonment. The declaration contained two counts. The defendant pleaded, 1. Not guilty; 2. A special plea, in bar to A „ , . • n the first count, stating that before the time when, &c. to wit, on the 15th September, 1812, at, &c.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass, assault and battery, and false imprisonment. The declaration contained two counts. The defendant pleaded, 1. Not guilty; 2. A special plea, in bar to A „ , . • n the first count, stating that before the time when, &c. to wit, on the 15th September, 1812, at, &c. Daniel D. Tompkins, Esq. g°vernor °f the state, &c. upon application of, and conformable to directions and by authority of, the President of the Unitea States, and pursuant to the act of congress passed the 28th oi ge]}ruarj, 1795 ordered into the public service of the Unitec States a portion of the…
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
The first ,nd second objections to the pleas are wholly untenable. It is tot necessary to allege that a case had occurred which gave uthority to the President of the United States to call forth the lilitia,under the act ofthe 28th of February, 1195. That act, after numerating the cases, on the occurrence of which the militia lay be called into the public service of the United States, vests i the president a high discretionary power: he, and he alone, ; made the judge, as well of the happening of the events, on diich the militia may be called forth, as of the number, time, nd destination of…
2Cited by29 opinions
- Wilkes v. DinsmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- Koehler & Lange v. HillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
- Evansville, Indianapolis & Cleveland Straight Line Railroad v. City of EvansvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
- Appeal of HartranftSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- English v. SmockIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.