Case law

Richards v. Hansen

1 F. 54 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Nov 24, 1879

Elliott v. Russell, 10 John. 7 ; King v. Shepherd, 3 Story, C. C. 349; Abbott on Ship. (8th Ed.) 478. … Bearse v. Ropes, 1 Sprague, 332 .

United States v. The La Jeune Eugenie

26 F. Cas. 832 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1822

The Fortuna, 1 Dod. 81; Madrazo v. Willes, 3 Barn. & Aid. 353. I shall take up no time in the examination of the history of slavery, or of the question, how far it is consistent with the natural rights of mankind. … I allude to the case of Madrazo v. Willes, 3 Barn. & Ald. 353, and particularly the opinion of Mr.

James v. Lycoming Ins.

13 F. Cas. 309 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 6, 1874

Co. v. Macmorran, 3 Dow, 202; Biccard v. Shepherd, 14 Moore, P. C. 475. … , and the condition of the policy was that the building should not be used for the purpose of storing therein any of the articles denominated hazardous in the policy, and the defendants proved that a tenant used it as a boarding-house

United States v. Hayward

26 F. Cas. 240 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1815

Rex v. Jarvis, 1 Burrows, 148, 1 East. 643, note; Spieres v. Parker, 1 Term R. 141; Rex v. Stone, 1 East, 639; Rex v. Pemberton, 2 Burrows. 1035. … Rex v. Stone, 1 East, 639; Frontine v. Frost. 3 Bos. & P. 307, note b; Rex v. Crowther, 1 Term R. 125; Spieres v. Parker, Id. 141; Attorney General v. Sheriff, Forrest, 43; Rex v. Turner, 5 Maule & S. 206.

McNeil v. Magee

16 F. Cas. 326 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1829

Goring v. Nash, 3 Atk. 186; Joynes v. Statham, Id. 387; Davis v. Symonds, 1 Cox, 402; Seymour v. Delancey. 6 Johns. Ch. 222 . … Cont. 19. 22, 260; Hayes v. Caryll, 1 Brown, Parl. Cas. 127; Van Benthuysen v. Crapser. 8 Johns. 198 ; 1 Fonbl. Eq. bk. 1, c. 6. §§ 1. 2, 12; Harrington v. Wheeler, 4 Ves. 686; Alley v. Deschamps, 13 Ves. 225; Wright v.

The San Jose Indiano

21 F. Cas. 389 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1814

Feise v. Wray, 3 East. 93; Rugg v. Minett. 11 East, 210; Hanson v. Meyer, 6 East, 614; *399 The Constantia, 6 C. Boh. Adm. 321; Kinloch v. Craig, 3 Term R. 119, 783. … I hold it to be clear law, that in a time of war parties are bound to put on board such papers as shall evince the neutrality of the property, if it be entitled to that character; and where shipments are made from an enemy

Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co. v. Smith

10 F. Cas. 743 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1874

Justice Clifford, in Jones v. Sewall [Id. 7,495]. … The case of Hotchkiss v.

In re Halladjian

174 F. 834 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Dec 24, 1909

Thus Eoredano, a Venetian admiral, wrote in 1416: ‘‘On board the captured [Turkish] ships we found Genoese, Catalans, Pro-vwic.' … In Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U. S. 698, 716 , 13 Sup. Ct. 1016, 37 L. Ed. 905 , it was said by Mr.

White v. Allen

29 F. Cas. 969 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Nov 15, 1863

Gayler v. Wilder, 10 How. [51 U. S.] 498; Parkhurst v. Kinsman [Case No. 10,757]; Curt. Pat. § 43. … Washburn v. Gould [Id. 17,214]; Woodcock v. Parker [Id. 17,971].

Howe v. Underwood

12 F. Cas. 678 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Feb 15, 1854

It is this: that Adoniram Hunt had this machine at Baltimore, while boarding in the Johnson family, and that one evening while there in 1835, he brought the machine to the house, to exhibit it as a matter of experiment and … [For other cases involving this patent, see Howe v. Morton, Case No. 6.769: Same v. Williams, Id. 6,778; and Hunt v. Howe, Id. 6,-«91.]

Smith v. Burnham

22 F. Cas. 465 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1838

Lord Hardwicke, in Lloyd v. … The case of Forsyth v.

Colt v. Massachusetts Arms Co.

6 F. Cas. 161 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Aug 15, 1851

Though, on that subject, if you think right to advert to it, you *169 can take not only the testimony upon both sides, but that oí the board of ordnance, which examined both, to see which was superior, and decided, for reasons … For other cases involving this patent. see Colt v. Young, Case No. 3,032; Young Colt, Id. 18,155.] “ The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.

The Fortitude

9 F. Cas. 479 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1838

In Webster v. … In the case of Freeman v.