Gibson v. Chew

Supreme Court

Gibson v. Chew

41 U.S. 315, 10 L. Ed. 977, 16 Pet. 315, 1842 U.S. LEXIS 372

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMarch 10, 1842

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 41 U.S. 315 (Gibson v. Chew) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gibson v. Chew, 41 U.S. 315, 10 L. Ed. 977, 16 Pet. 315, 1842 U.S. LEXIS 372 (1842).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Wayne

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This suit was brought in the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Mississippi, by the defendant in error, as the endorsee of a promissory'note, made in Mississippi, of which the plaintiff in error, Martin, was the payee, and the plaintiff, Gibson, the maker; both maker'and payee being citizens of the state of Mississippi when the note was made.

The jurisdiction of. the Court is denied,, and the plea should have been sustained in the-Court below, as the Circuit Courts of the United States, have not cognisance of any suit to recover the contents of any promissory note, or other chose in action in favour of an assignee, unless a suit might have been prosecuted in such Court to recover the said contents, if no assignment had been made, except.in cases of foreign bills of exchange. See the eleventh section of the act to establish the judicial Courts of. the United States, 1 Story’s Laws, 53.

The judgment of the Court below is reversed.

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

Mr. Justice Wayne

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This suit was brought in the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of Mississippi, by the defendant in error, as the endorsee of a promissory'note, made in Mississippi, of which the plaintiff in error, Martin, was the payee, and the plaintiff, Gibson, the maker; both maker'and payee being citizens of the state of Mississippi when the note was made.

The jurisdiction of. the Court is denied,, and the plea should have been sustained in the-Court below, as the Circuit Courts of the United States, have not cognisance of any suit to recover the contents of any promissory note, or other chose in action in favour of an assignee, unless a suit might have been prosecuted in such Court to recover the said contents, if no assignment had been made, except.in cases of foreign bills of exchange. See the eleventh section of the act to establish the judicial Courts of. the United States, 1 Story’s Laws, 53.

The judgment of the Court below is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 U.S. 315, 10 L. Ed. 977, 16 Pet. 315, 1842 U.S. LEXIS 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibson-v-chew-scotus-1842.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack