Mills v. Smith
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illinois: the case was this: In 1818, the United States issued to one Parmely, a soldier of the war of 1812, and then residing in Connecticut, a patent for a tract of land in Illinois. In 1837, he sold the land to Edwin Lacy, and receiving payment in full for it, executed and delivered to Lacy, at the time, a regular deed.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illinois: the case was this: In 1818, the United States issued to one Parmely, a soldier of the war of 1812, and then residing in Connecticut, a patent for a tract of land in Illinois. In 1837, he sold the land to Edwin Lacy, and receiving payment in full for it, executed and delivered to Lacy, at the time, a regular deed. This deed, however, was never recorded,, and at Lacy’s death, in 1848, his family had no information respecting the deed, or the location of the land. Lacy left one son and only heir named Andrew. On the 14th of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Grier
The counsel, in their arguments in this case, seem to ■have forgotten that this court have no right to order a new trial because they maj' [mlieve that.the jury may have erred in their verdict on the facts. If the court below have given proper instructions on tjie questions of law, and subrniued the facts to the jury, there is no further remedy in this court for any supposed mistake of the jury.
On examining the charge of the court below, we find a clear exposition of the legal' questions arising in the case.
The jury were .properly instructed that the deed of Parmely, the patentee, to Edwin…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Mills v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1869