James L. v. Carryl
Supreme Court of the United States
This case was brought up from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,' by a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth sec.tion of the judiciary act. The facts of the case are particularly stated in the opinion of the court. The Reporter would be much pleased if he could place before his readers an extended report of the arguments of counsel in a case of such importance and general interest to the profession as the present.
Read the full summary
This case was brought up from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,' by a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth sec.tion of the judiciary act. The facts of the case are particularly stated in the opinion of the court. The Reporter would be much pleased if he could place before his readers an extended report of the arguments of counsel in a case of such importance and general interest to the profession as the present. But he is admonished by the size to which the present volume has grown, that it has already reached the customary limits of such a work; and all that he can do is to present a…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Campbell
This. cause comes before this court by writ of error to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, under the twenty-fifth section of the judiciary act of the 24th September, 1789.
The defendants (Ward & Co.) instituted an action of replevin in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, for the barque Royal Saxon.
Upon the trial'of the cause at nisi prius, it appeared that the-barque arrived at the port of Philadelphia in October, 1847, on a trading voyage, and was the property of Robert McIntyre, of Londonderry, in Ireland. In November, 1847, she was seized-by the sheriff of Philadelphia county, under a writ…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Peck v. JennessSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- Schooner Freeman, &C. v. BuckinghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Harris v. DennieSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Pulliam v. OsborneSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Morgan v. WatmoughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
3Cited by245 opinions
- United States v. James Daniel Good Real PropertySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Ex Parte RoyallSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Covell v. HeymanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Penn Central Casualty Co. v. Pennsylvania Ex Rel. SchnaderSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Toucey v. New York Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
240 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.