Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Co. v. Barcroft

4 D.C. 659

This text of 4 D.C. 659 (Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Co. v. Barcroft) 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
Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Co. v. Barcroft, 4 D.C. 659 (circtddc 1835).

Opinion

The Court

(nem. cm.) quashed the execution in this case, because'the supersedeas judgment, upon which it was issued, was not confessed until after the expiration of two months after the original judgment. See the following cases heretofore decided by this Court, namely, Hodgson v. Mountz & Knowles, at December term, 1806, (1 Cranch, C. C. 366); Smith v. Middleton, April term, 1821, (2 Cranch, C. C. 233); Mandeville v. Love, October term, 1821, (Id. 249); McSherry v. Queen et al., April term, 1823, (Id. 406); Holmes v. Bussard, April term, 1823, (Id. 401); and Thomas v. Elliot, October term, 1823, (Id. 432.)

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

Related

Smith v. Middleton
22 F. Cas. 602 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia, 1821)
Hodgson v. Mountz
12 F. Cas. 286 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia, 1806)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 D.C. 659, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chesapeake-ohio-canal-co-v-barcroft-circtddc-1835.