Alexandria v. Mandeville

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Alexandria v. Mandeville

1 F. Cas. 393, 2 Cranch 224

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedNovember 15, 1820

StatusPublished

This text of 1 F. Cas. 393 (Alexandria v. Mandeville) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alexandria v. Mandeville, 1 F. Cas. 393, 2 Cranch 224 (circtddc 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge,

absent) refused to permit such evidence to be given, deeming it irrelevant and immaterial.

He also offered evidence that tbe pavement was badly' done. But tbe court rejected tbe evidence; and in tbe case of Common Council v. Swann, [Case No. 3,066,] at tbe same term, decided (THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent) that it was only competent for tbe defendant to show that tbe contract made by tbe common council for tbe pavement was not fairly made, or fraudulent, or not with good faith.

Judgment for tbe plaintiff.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge,

absent) refused to permit such evidence to be given, deeming it irrelevant and immaterial.

He also offered evidence that tbe pavement was badly' done. But tbe court rejected tbe evidence; and in tbe case of Common Council v. Swann, [Case No. 3,066,] at tbe same term, decided (THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent) that it was only competent for tbe defendant to show that tbe contract made by tbe common council for tbe pavement was not fairly made, or fraudulent, or not with good faith.

Judgment for tbe plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 F. Cas. 393, 2 Cranch 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexandria-v-mandeville-circtddc-1820.