Skip to main content

Thelasson vs. Crammond

Case Year
1806
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“Upon an affidavit that the defendant had not, until last night, discovered ground for an additional exception to the award; the Court permitted him to file it, saying; though the same reason might not have been a sufficient one to sanction the filing of exceptions originally, after the four days, because then the cause might be out of the reach of the Court; yet, as the cause is depending, an amendment may be made, where the proper foundation is laid for asking the indulgence.”

Lessee of James vs. Stookey and Others

Case Year
1806
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“This was an ejectment for a tract of land in Berks county. The plaintiff claimed under a warrant to Richard Hockley, and others, dated in 1762, which recited, that a former warrant had issued to the same persons for this land, and had been surveyed, but not returned. He then offered in evidence a survey of this land, rather a re-survey made by one Jacobs, who was not an authorized or commissioned surveyor; in virtue of a letter to him from the Surveyor General, in which he stated; that, at the request of Mr.

Hylton's Lessee vs. Brown

Case Year
1804
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“A rule was obtained at the October term, in 1803, to set aside the nonsuit entered in this cause; and the question now came on to be argued . . . in an ejectment, the plaintiff must show, and it is enough for his purpose, if he does show a right of entry; or, in other words, a right of possession. If he prove twenty years’ possession, or the seisin of his ancestor, and a descent cast, it is in general sufficient, prima facie, unless the defendant show a better right.

Walker vs. Smith

Case Year
1804
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“Rule for a new trial; the jury having found, contrary to the charge of the Court, which laid down, as the rule for estimating the damages, the loss which the plaintiff had sustained by the misconduct of the defendant, in violating his orders. The jury have given only the principal sum due, without interest; have allowed the defendant his commissions, though he claimed none; and have rated the exchange at par, when it was higher. Besides which, they have said, that the plaintiff shall not have costs.”

Marks et al. Assignees of Anthony & Pleasant, Bankrupts, vs. Barker & Ansley

Case Year
1804
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“Action of indebitatus assumpsit, for money had and received to use of bankrupts, and goods sold and delivered by them. Plea, non assumpsit, and notice to offset. The case was—Anthony & Pleasants, having shipped a cargo of tobacco and flour to John Waring, in Bristol, and intending to ship more; drew bills, as they were permitted to do, on Waring, for two-thirds the cost of those cargoes; which they got the defendants in Philadelphia, to endorse and negotiate for them on the usual commission.

Reutgen vs. Kanowrs & Graunt

Case Year
1804
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“This was an action to recover damages for the invasion of the plaintiff’s patent right to a machine for rounding iron. It appeared in evidence, that the defendant, Kanowrs, was a farmer, and had on his farm, a common tilt or hammer and anvil, worked by water. The plaintiff, a German, and poor; informed Kanowrs, that he had invented a machine for rounding iron; but, from want of funds, had not been able to bring his theory to practice.

Kohne vs. Insurance Company of North America

Case Year
1804
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“This cause came on to be retried at this term. The evidence given at the last term, was again produced, and in addition thereto, a complete record of the proceedings in the Vice Admiralty Court at Halifax, was produced, and read. In it is stated at length, the following papers. A passport from the Spanish Consul, at Charleston, to the plaintiff, 17th February 1799, to go to Laguira, to attend to his concerns there.

F. W. Sperry vs. The Delaware Insurance Company

Case Year
1808
Court Case Term
State
Court Case Type

“The policy in question, was effected on the 27th of June, 1807, on goods, the property of the plaintiff, an American citizen, on board the Little William, belonging to Jacob Sperry, also an American citizen, at and from Philadelphia to Tonningen, or Hamburg, if not blockaded; warranted American property, proof whereof to be made here. She sailed on the voyage insured, on the 3d of July 1807.

Boston Manufacturing Company vs. Jonathan Fiske and Another

Case Year
1820
Court Case Term
Court Case Type

“Case for infringing a patent for ‘a new and useful improvement of a spinning frame for spinning cotton,’ invented by Paul Moody, and assigned by him to the plaintiffs. The patent was dated the 17th of January, 1818, and the assignment the 14th of January, 1819.

Subscribe to October Term