Case law

The Brutus

4 F. Cas. 490 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1815

In short, a cruise is nothing but a voyage for a given purpose (see Brown v. Jones [Case No. 2,017]; Douglass v. Eyre [Id. 4,032]; Magee v. Moss [Id. 8,944]; 1 Hall, Law J. [N. S.] 207; Abb. *495 Shipp., 7th Lond. … Morrough v. Comyns, 1 Wils. 211.

Brooks v. Byam

4 F. Cas. 261 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1843

It is upon the like reaso'n, that the case of Ards v. Watkin, Cro. Eliz. 637, 651, is there attempted to be supported. In Ewer v. … “Apportionment,” B, § 19, and reported as the case of Morse v.

Alsop v. Commercial Ins. Co.

1 F. Cas. 564 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1833

Ch. 322; Bland v. Archbishop of Armagh, 3 Brown, Parl. Cas. 620. See Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co., 4 Tick. 429, 437. See'3 Kent, Comm. (2d Ed.) Lect. 48, p. 275. See Kent v. Bird, Cowp. 583. Marsh. … Review & New Trial, C. k., p. 681; Astor v. Union Ins. Co., 7 Cow. 202 ; Ackley v. Kellogg, 8 Cow. 223 ; Douglass v. Tousey, 2 Wend. 352 ; Smith v. Hicks, 5 Wend. 48 . See Dickenson v. Blake, 7 Brown, Parl.

Hubbard v. New York, N. E. & W. Investment Co.

14 F. 675 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Nov 15, 1882

In entering into this contract, I perceive no evidence in the case from which to infer that either the plaintiff or the board of directors had any purpose to perpetrate a fraud on the corporation, or to grant to the plaintiff … Wathen, 60 Ill. 138 ; Harts v. Brown, 77 Ill. 226 ; Paine v. Lake Erie & L. R. Co. 31 Ind. 283 ; Port v. Russell 36 Ind. 60 ; First Nat. Bank v. Gifford, 47 Iowa, 575 ; Cumberland Coal Co. v.

Salmon Falls Manuf'g Co. v. The Tangier

21 F. Cas. 259 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1857

Garrison v. Memphis Ins. Co., 19 How. [60 U. S.) 312; Airey v. Merrill [Case No. 115). … See also Ostrander v. Brown, 15 Johns. 39 , where it is expressly laid down that landing on a wharf is not delivery.

Kleine v. Catara

14 F. Cas. 732 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1814

Price v. Williams, 1 Ves. Jr. 365; 3 Browne, Ch. 163; 1 Browne, Ch. 117, 536; Morgan v. Mather, 2 Ves. Jr. 15; Dick v. Milligan, Id. 23. … Bethune. 3 Johns. 342 , have decided, that when the return cargo was not ready to be put on board at the appointed time, from that moment the contract terminated to all intents and purposes, and both parties were absolved

Simpson v. Pacific Mut. Ins.

22 F. Cas. 174 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Mar 15, 1872

In Brown v. … There the whole crew remained on board, and the vessel was in all respects really continuing her voyage.” In the case of Whitwell v.

Wood v. Mann

30 F. Cas. 458 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1838

What has such a case to do with circumstances, like those in Richardson v. Jones. 3 Gill' & J. 164? … The very point was decided by Lord Eldon in Seton v.

In re Brown

4 F. Cas. 342 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1843

I am aware of the case of Brown v. Lusk, 4 Yerg. 210 , in which it was held, that a check, drawn in Nashville, on the Branch Bank of the United States at Nashville, on the 13th of December, 1827, payable to A. … The learned judge, who delivered the opinion of the court in Brown v. Lusk, added: “They (checks) are appropriations of money in the hands of a banker, and are payable on presentment.”

United States v. Sawyer

27 F. Cas. 967 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1812

When the practice first began is perhaps not exactly ascertained; but about this very time, in Kynaston v. Mayor, etc., of Shrewsbury, 2 Strange, 1051, 7 Brown, Parl. … In the state of New York, the practice invariably obtains (Brown v. Clark, 3 Johns. 443 ), and it has been deliberately adopted by the supreme court of Massachusetts (Keyes v. Stone, 5 Mass. 391 ; Wilson v. Mower.

International Harvester Co. v. Richardson Mfg. Co.

172 F. 436 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Aug 19, 1909

The spreader now made by the defendant is covered by two patents, Nos. '731,539 and 821,779, granted to Theophilus Brown for improvements in manure spreaders. … The range of equivalents depends upon the nature and extent of the invention (Miller v. Eagle Company, 151 U. S. 186, 209 , 14 Sup. Ct. 310, 38 L.

United States v. Stoddard, Haserick, Richards & Co.

89 F. 699 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 11, 1898

Panter v. Attorney General, 6 Brown, Parl. Cas. 486, 490. In support of the rule are urged the difficulties attending an inquiry into the time when a law was approved. … Decision of board of general appraisers affirmed.

Brooks v. Byam

4 F. Cas. 258 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1840

Ev. 19, 20; Potter v. Potter, 1 Ves. Sr. 274; Cooth v. Jackson, 6 Ves. 37, 38; Story, Eq. Pl. § 854. … Pr. 257; Amhurst v. King, 2 Sim. & S. 183.

The Boston

3 F. Cas. 932 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 15, 1833

See Mason v. The Blaireau, 2 Cranch [6 U. S.] 240; Abb. Shipp, pt. 4, c. 3, § 5, p. 272, note; Spurr v. Pearson [supra]. … See Hoyt v. Wildfire, 3 Johns. 518 ; Lewis v. Davis, 3 Johns. 17 ; Spurr v. Pearson [Case No. 13,268].

In re Saito

62 F. 126 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Jun 27, 1894

These types are the Australioid (chocolate brown), Negroid (brown black), Mongoloid (yellow), and Xanthochroic (fair whites). To these he adds a fifth variety, the Melanochroic (dark whites). … See, also, In re Camille, 6 Sawy. 541 , 6 Fed. 256 ; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94 , 5 Sup. Ct. 41; Fong Yue Ting v. U. S., 149 U. S. 698, 716 , 13 Sup. Ct. 1016.

Franklin County Nat. Bank v. Beal

49 F. 606 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Mar 11, 1892

Among these inclosures was a note for $10,000, drawn by Brown, Durrell & Co., of Boston, payable to their own order, indorsed by them and also by J. A. Brown. … Marine Bank v. Fulton Bank, 2 Wall. 252, 256 . In the case of Manufacturers’ Nat. Bank v. Continental Bank, 148 Mass. 555 , 20 N. E.

Bank at Hamburg v. Flynn

38 F. 798 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · May 1, 1889

Nor can it be said that Brown, Shipley & Co. or Brown Bros. & Co. are bona fide holders for value of these drafts, and that the defendants get a good title through them. … Drummond v. Prestman, 12 Wheat. 515 . The drafts in question have been deposited with the clerk by the defendants Catherine J. Flynn and John M. Flynn, to be held subject to the order of the court.

Thompson & Norris Co. v. Moxie Nerve Food Co.

189 F. 911 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Aug 8, 1911

BROWN, District Judge. The bill charges infringement of letters patent No. 674,009, May 14, 1901, to C. W. Lewis, for a knockdown paper box. The claims are as follows: *912 “1. … The following decisions concerning paper box patents are cited by complainant: National Folding Box & Paper Co. v. Elsas, 86 Fed. 917 , 30 C. C. A. 487 ; Whitney v. Gair (C.

Leland v. Medora

15 F. Cas. 298 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1846

Raym. 805; 2 Browne, Civ. & Adm. Law, 35. And so here. North v. The Eagle [Case No. 10,309]; Woodruff v. The Levi Dearborne [Id. 17,988]. … Briggs v. French [Case No. 1,870]; [Massie v. Watts] 6 Cranch [10 U. S.] 148; [Peirsoll v. Elliott] 6 Pet. [31 U. S.] 95; 2 Brown, Parl. Cas. 39.

Delano v. Winsor

7 F. Cas. 384 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · Oct 15, 1860

Union Bank of Georgetown v. Geary, 5 Pet. [30 U. S.] 111; Atkinson v. Manks, 1 Cow. 703 ; Walton v. Hobbs, 2 Atk. 19; Pember v. Mathers, 1 Brown, Ch. 52. … Hughes v. Blake, 6 Wheat. [19 U. S.] 453.