Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Supreme Court of the United States Volume 22; (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1906 Excerpt: ... Maxwell tl al. v. Moore et al. more speedy relief, and might be more satisfactory, but we must administer the law as we find it. The bond and security given on the writ of error cannot be regarded as an idle ceremony. It was designed as an indemnity to the defendant in error, should the plaintiff fail to prosecute with effect his writ of error. We can entertain no doubt that the writ of error is the legal mode of revising the judgment of the Circuit Court in this case; and that security having been given on the judgment, as the law requires, it is superseded. Mr. Justice WAYNE and Mr. Justice GRIER dissented. David Maxwell, And Thomas Watkins And Mary Watkins His Wife, Plaintiffs In Error, V. Israel M. Moore, Madison M. Morris, Henry Morris, James P. Kellen, John F. Black, James F. Batte, And William M. Craig. An act of Congress, passed in 1812, (2 Stat. at L., 729, ) gave a bounty of 160 acres of land to every regular soldier of the army, and made void all sales or agreements by the grantee before the patent issued. Another act, passed in 1826, (4 Stat-at L., 190, ) permitted the soldier, under certain circumstances, to surrender his patent, and select other land. This act did not contain the avoiding clause contained in the first act. These acts have no necessary connection in this particular, and an agreement to convey, made after the first patent was surrendered, and before the second was issued, held to be valid and binding. This case was brought up from the Supreme Court of the State of Arkansas by a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the judiciary act. Maxwell and Watkins brought an ejectment against Moore and others, to recover the northeast quarter of section ten, in township seven north, range seven west, containing 160 acres of land, i..

R402

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles4020
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1906 Excerpt: ... Maxwell tl al. v. Moore et al. more speedy relief, and might be more satisfactory, but we must administer the law as we find it. The bond and security given on the writ of error cannot be regarded as an idle ceremony. It was designed as an indemnity to the defendant in error, should the plaintiff fail to prosecute with effect his writ of error. We can entertain no doubt that the writ of error is the legal mode of revising the judgment of the Circuit Court in this case; and that security having been given on the judgment, as the law requires, it is superseded. Mr. Justice WAYNE and Mr. Justice GRIER dissented. David Maxwell, And Thomas Watkins And Mary Watkins His Wife, Plaintiffs In Error, V. Israel M. Moore, Madison M. Morris, Henry Morris, James P. Kellen, John F. Black, James F. Batte, And William M. Craig. An act of Congress, passed in 1812, (2 Stat. at L., 729, ) gave a bounty of 160 acres of land to every regular soldier of the army, and made void all sales or agreements by the grantee before the patent issued. Another act, passed in 1826, (4 Stat-at L., 190, ) permitted the soldier, under certain circumstances, to surrender his patent, and select other land. This act did not contain the avoiding clause contained in the first act. These acts have no necessary connection in this particular, and an agreement to convey, made after the first patent was surrendered, and before the second was issued, held to be valid and binding. This case was brought up from the Supreme Court of the State of Arkansas by a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the judiciary act. Maxwell and Watkins brought an ejectment against Moore and others, to recover the northeast quarter of section ten, in township seven north, range seven west, containing 160 acres of land, i..

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

February 2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

February 2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 10mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

190

ISBN-13

978-1-150-47814-7

Barcode

9781150478147

Categories

LSN

1-150-47814-4



Trending On Loot