Planters' Bank v. Sharp
Supreme Court of the United States
■ These two cases were both brought up, by writ of error issued under the -twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, from the High Court of Errors and Appeals for the State of. Mississippi. They were kindred cases, and were argued together. Although the court pronounced an opinion in each case separately, yet the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Daniel treats them as they were argued, and hence it becomes, necessary to blend the two cases together.
Read the full summary
■ These two cases were both brought up, by writ of error issued under the -twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, from the High Court of Errors and Appeals for the State of. Mississippi. They were kindred cases, and were argued together. Although the court pronounced an opinion in each case separately, yet the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Daniel treats them as they were argued, and hence it becomes, necessary to blend the two cases together. The facts in each case will be stated, then the arguments of counsel, and then the opinions of the court, with the separate opinion of Mr.…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woodbury
Planters’ Bank v. Sharp et al.
The question to be considered in this case is, whether an act of the legislature of Mississippi, passed February 21st, .1840, impaired the obligation of any contract which the State or others, had previously entered into with the Planters’ Bank.
If it did, the clause in the Constitution of the United States, expressly prohibiting a State from passing any such law, has been violated, and the plaintiffs in error are entitled to judgment.
But, on the contrary, .if that act does not impair the obligation of any contract, the judgment below in favor of the defendants…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Boyd's Lessee v. GravesSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Bank of Columbia v. OkelySupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Bank of Augusta v. EarleSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Green v. BiddleSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by146 opinions
- Home Building & Loan Assn. v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Pearsall v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Beaver County Building & Loan Ass'n v. WinowichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Langever v. MillerTexas Supreme Court · 1934
- Ruano v. SpellmanWashington Supreme Court · 1973
141 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.