Corporation of Washington v. Walker

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

Corporation of Washington v. Walker

29 F. Cas. 357, 2 D.C. 293, 2 Cranch 293

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

DecidedApril 15, 1822

StatusPublished

This text of 29 F. Cas. 357 (Corporation of Washington v. Walker) 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

Corporation of Washington v. Walker, 29 F. Cas. 357, 2 D.C. 293, 2 Cranch 293 (circtddc 1822).

Pincite

Opinion

But the Court

(Morsell, J., contra,)

decided that the defendant is liable upon this bond, dated in June, 1816, for all collections of taxes made by him, after the date of the bond, and before his resignation in October, 1816, although such collections consisted of arrearages of taxes due in former years ; the by-law of 1812 having expressly made it the duty of every new collector to collect such arrearages; and as the defendant was collector of the preceding year it was not necessary that he should have been furnished by the register with a new list of arrearages, because the defendant must have himself known what the arrearages were.

Thruston, J.,

was of opinion that this bond covers all moneys in the defendant’s hands at any time after its date.

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

But the Court

(Morsell, J., contra,)

decided that the defendant is liable upon this bond, dated in June, 1816, for all collections of taxes made by him, after the date of the bond, and before his resignation in October, 1816, although such collections consisted of arrearages of taxes due in former years ; the by-law of 1812 having expressly made it the duty of every new collector to collect such arrearages; and as the defendant was collector of the preceding year it was not necessary that he should have been furnished by the register with a new list of arrearages, because the defendant must have himself known what the arrearages were.

Thruston, J.,

was of opinion that this bond covers all moneys in the defendant’s hands at any time after its date.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 F. Cas. 357, 2 D.C. 293, 2 Cranch 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corporation-of-washington-v-walker-circtddc-1822.