Anonymous
United States Circuit Court
In equity. J. S. M. being the father of an illegitimate child by a former connexion, and now about to marry another woman, settled, in March 1833, of his own suggestion, $3000, personal estate, in trust for the child; himself retaining no interest in the property, which, was transferred to the trustee and the possession of it surrendered.
Read the full summary
In equity. J. S. M. being the father of an illegitimate child by a former connexion, and now about to marry another woman, settled, in March 1833, of his own suggestion, $3000, personal estate, in trust for the child; himself retaining no interest in the property, which, was transferred to the trustee and the possession of it surrendered. His whole estate, in round numbers, and beyond that settled, was $13000: his debts $1700: they were simple contract debts not specially secured. His marriage took place about a month afterwards. He was in trade at the time of the settlement; about half of…
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT. It is clear that opinions of counsel cannot be considered as of authority in any strict sense of the word: but in this day when the limits of technical precedent have been a good deal broken down, they may be used by the court, at its discretion, to assist its researches and judgment. Lord Holt. Lord Kenyon and Chief Justice Marshall, all of them men of Strict minds, have severally referred to the statements of counsel made arguendo. Fisher v. Wigg, 1 Ld. Raym. 622, 631; Sadgrove v. Kirby, 6 Term R. 483, 486; Sexton v. Wheaton, 8 Wheat. [21 U. S.] 229, 243. Lord Talbot in 1734,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Reade v. LivingstonNew York Court of Chancery · 1818
- Salmon v. BennettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1816
- Van Wyck v. SewardNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
- Pratt's Lessee v. FlamerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1820
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rudy v. AustinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Kennedy v. NunanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877