Strader v. Baldwin
Supreme Court of the United States
■ This c.ase was brought up, from the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio, within and for the County of Hamilton, by a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act. The case arose in this way. Baldwin was a clerk in the Commercial Bank of Cincinnati.
Read the full summary
■ This c.ase was brought up, from the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio, within and for the County of Hamilton, by a writ of error issued under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act. The case arose in this way. Baldwin was a clerk in the Commercial Bank of Cincinnati. In 1844, the trustees of the bank brought an action of assumpsit against him for $ 10,000. Baldwin pleaded, amongst other matters, that he had received a discharge under the bankrupt law passed by Congress. The plaintiffs filed a replication, that the debt was contracted whilst Baldwin was acting in a fiduciary…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Grier
This case is brought here by a writ of error to the Supreme Court of Ohio.
As the power of this court to review the decisions of State tribunals is limited to certain specified cases and conditions, the first inquiry which necessarily presents itself 'is* whether we have -jurisdiction.
The plaintiffs in error instituted this suit in the Superior Court of Cincinnati. The declaration has the common counts in assumpsit. The defendant appeared and pleaded his discharge under the act of Congress of the 19th of August, 1841, to “ establish a uniform system of bankruptcy, &c.” The plaintiffs denied…
2Cited by7 opinions
- McCormick v. Market BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Missouri v. AndrianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Dillingham v. ParksIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
- Bombolaski v. First National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1913
- Bank v. . MyersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.