Berry

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

Berry

3 F. Cas. 285, 2 D.C. 13, 2 Cranch 13

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1810

StatusPublished

This text of 3 F. Cas. 285 (Berry) 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

Berry, 3 F. Cas. 285, 2 D.C. 13, 2 Cranch 13 (circtddc 1810).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

(Thruston, J., absent,)

refused.

1. Because they had no right to appropriate a public landing to the purposes of a ferry.

2. Because the old ferry from Hunting Creek to Addison’s having been disused for more than two years and six months, had been discontinued under the Act of Virginia, and the Court had no right to grant a new ferry ; having only the powers of a County Court of Virginia in this respect.

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

The Court

(Thruston, J., absent,)

refused.

1. Because they had no right to appropriate a public landing to the purposes of a ferry.

2. Because the old ferry from Hunting Creek to Addison’s having been disused for more than two years and six months, had been discontinued under the Act of Virginia, and the Court had no right to grant a new ferry ; having only the powers of a County Court of Virginia in this respect.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 F. Cas. 285, 2 D.C. 13, 2 Cranch 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berry-circtddc-1810.