Case law

Henderson v. Tompkins

60 F. 758 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Mar 21, 1894

It was pointed out by the court in Industries Co. v. Grace, ubi supra, that as Brown v. … But the latter, as stated in Brown v.

Smith v. Downing

22 F. Cas. 511 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Jun 15, 1850

Haworth v. Hardcastle, 1 Webst. Pat. Cas. 485; Davoll v. Brown [Case No. 3,662]; [Grant v. Raymond] 6 Pet. [31 C. S.] 218; Wyeth v. Stone [Case No. 18,107]; Blanchard v. Sprague [Id. 1,518]; 1 Leeman, 482. … See Wyeth v. Stone [supra]; Blanchard v. Sprague [supra]; Ames v. Howard [Case No. 320]; 1 Webst. Tat. Cas. 485; [Grant v. Raymond] 6 Pet [31 U. S.] 218; Davoll v. Brown [supra].

Allen v. Hitch

1 F. Cas. 474 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1854

In Stratton v. Jarvis, 8 Pet. [33 U. … See, also, Airey v. Merrill, [Case No. 115.]

The Marion

16 F. Cas. 751 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1840

See Peyroux v. Howard, 7 Pet. [32 U. S.] 324. See also, The Robert Fulton [Case No. 11,890]; Davis v. … Spooner was doing the work of a painter on board during a part of the same period.

Consolidated Store-Service Co. v. Wilson

83 F. 201 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 20, 1897

It is unnecessary to discuss the other prior patents contained in the record, because the nearest approach to the Osgood device are the devices described in the White and Brown patents. … The two patents now in suit were sustained at final hearing jto this court by Judge Carpenter in the case of This Complainant v. Whipple, 75 Fed. 27 .

Pierce v. Winsor

19 F. Cas. 652 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1861

In Brass v. … He hires the whole ship, and has a right to put on board a full cargo, and he must not put on board goods which will injure the ship, and cause her owners to become responsible to other shippers for damage done.

United States v. The Isla De Cuba

26 F. Cas. 548 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1804

the main hatch, was also found on board. … Castle v. Bullard, 23 How. [64 U. S.] 187.

Kemp v. McBride

129 F. 382 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Apr 18, 1904

He also made a leather-board pattern of it, and began the construction of a model, partly of metal and partly of wood. He completed the model in the early part of the year 1899. … Justice Brown comments upon certain unpatented devices claimed to be anticipatory of the patent in suit in that case, the existence of which was proved only by oral testimony.

Morley v. Thayer

3 F. 737 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Sep 30, 1880

Brinckerhoff v. Brown, 7 John. Ch. 216, 217, 226. … Knowlton v. Ackley, 8 Cush. 93 , 97; Kelton v. Phillips, 3 Met. 61 ; Dauchy v. Brown, 24 Vt. 197 -203.

Jordan v. Williams

13 F. Cas. 1115 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1851

S. v. Ruggles [Case No. 10,205]; Jay v. Almy [Id. 7,236]; Wilson v. The Mary [Id. 17,823]; Magee v. … From analogy to the rule followed by Judge Hop-kinson, in the case of Brower v.

The Porpoise

19 F. Cas. 1064 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1855

S. v. Morris, 14 Pet. [39 U. S.] 464. … S. v. Morris, 14 Pet. [39 U. S.] 464, already referred to. Let a decree be entered reversing the decree of the district court, and pronouncing for the forfeiture.

Cloutman v. Tunison

5 F. Cas. 1091 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1833

Shipp, pp. 463-472, pt. 4. c. 3, § 3. and Story’s Notes (Ed. 1829); Frontino v. Frost, 3 Bos. & P. 302. … See Cotel v. Hilliard, 4 Mass. 664 . It supposes, therefore, that the voyage is still in transit; and can by no reasonable interpretation extend to any absence after the voyage is ended.

The Abby

1 F. Cas. 74 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1818

It is immaterial, whether she had on board one bag or one hundred bags of sugar received from the ship. … S. v. Hamilton. Case No. 15.290; U. S. v. Smith, Id. 16,337. Inlets of the sea which are so narrow that one may readily discern an object from shore to shore are not properly the high seas. U. S. v.

Loring v. Marsh

15 F. Cas. 898 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1864

Attention has very properly been called, since the argument, to the case of Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church v. McMaster [Case No. 1,586], as asserting a contrary doctrine. … White v. Whitman [Case No. 17,561]; Lyman v. Brown [Id. 8,627]; Wadleigh v. Veazie [supra]. The same rule is established in most of the states. Bowne v. Joy, 9 Johns. 221 ; Walsh v. Durkin, 12 Johns. 99 ; McJilton v.

The Hope

12 F. Cas. 482 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1814

On her arrival, she was reported as in ballast, and her manifest contained no statement of any British merchandise being on board. … Fuller v. Jackson, Bunb. 139; Spong v. Fasting, Id. 203. Vide, also, Green v. New River Co., 4 Term R. 589; Bird v. Thompson, 1 Esp. 339; Rickson v. Sandforth, Bunb. 139, note; Taylor v. McViccar, 6 Esp. 27.

Briggs v. French

4 F. Cas. 116 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1833

And the very case of Welby v. Duke of Rutland, 2 Brown, Parl. Cas. 39, which is cited by the defendant, shows, that there are exceptions to the rule. In the case of Hamilton v. Cummings, 1 Johns. Ch. 517 , Mr. … In Peirsoll v. Elliot, 6 Pet. [31 U.

Poor v. Carleton

19 F. Cas. 1013 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1837

Bowes, 2 Dickens, 673, 1 Cox, Ch. 263, 2 Brown, Ch. 88; by Lord Eldon, in Norway v. Rowe, 19 Ves. 153, and Peacock v. Peacock, 16 Ves. 49. See, also, Isaac v. Humpage, 1 Ves. Jr. 427, 2 Brown, Ch; 463; Mr. … Tbe cases of Roberts v. Anderson, 2 Johns. Ch. 202, 204 ; Ward v. Van Bokkelen, 1 Paige, 100 ; Fulton Bank v. New York & S. Canal Co., 1 Paige, 311 ; Rodgers v.

Jackson v. United States

13 F. Cas. 254 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1826

This has been often decided in this court; and the principle is affirmed by the supreme court, in Harford v. U. S., 8 Cranch [12 U. S.] 109. See The Betsy [Case No. 1,365]. … The case of Peisch v. Ware, 4 Cranch [8 U. S.] 346 is cited in support of this position.

The Henry Ewbank

11 F. Cas. 1166 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1833

Bond v. The Cora [Case No. 1,621). … See The Harmony [Case No. 3,089]; Bond v. The Cora [Id. 1,620]. My Brother, Mr. Justice Washington, adopted it after grave examination in the case of Bond v.

Knowlton v. Boss

14 F. Cas. 794 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Dec 15, 1848

Crosby, the mate, was unfit to hold office on board ship. … Jordan v. Williams [Case No. 7,528]; Shorey v. Rennell [Id. 12,806].