Gavinzel v. Crump
Supreme Court of the United States
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia. George Gavinzel, M.D., a Swiss, resident in Richmond, Virginia, on the 20th of November, 1863, the rebellion being then flagrant, and “ Confederate notes,” as they were called— that is to say, notes issued by the rebel confederacy — being the only currency common in Richmond, agreed to lend to Robert Crump, a resident, like himself, of Richmond, and whose family physician he was, the sum…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia. George Gavinzel, M.D., a Swiss, resident in Richmond, Virginia, on the 20th of November, 1863, the rebellion being then flagrant, and “ Confederate notes,” as they were called— that is to say, notes issued by the rebel confederacy — being the only currency common in Richmond, agreed to lend to Robert Crump, a resident, like himself, of Richmond, and whose family physician he was, the sum of $3260 in the said notes; the notes, at the time, having become so far depreciated that the $3260 lent in them were…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Davis
The main question in the case arises on the construction of the bond.
The bond is peculiar in its character and unusual in its terms. It is not due until the close of the war of the rebellion, and not even then until specific demand is made for the money. Two things must- concurto give the obligee or his representative a right of action : the termination of the war and demand for the money. On demand, if the war has closed, the bond can be discharged, by the payment of the principal sum, without interest, but the borrower, if he chooses, can retain the money two years longer by paying legal…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Portland Web Pressmen's Union Local No. 17 v. Oregonian Publishing Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 1960
- Henrietta Mills v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1931
- Ruston Drilling Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1936
- Lumley v. Wabash Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1895
- Hongkong & Whampoa Dock Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.