Hollingsworth v. Adams
2 U.S. 396, 1 L. Ed. 431, 2 Dall. 396, 1798 U.S. LEXIS 159
This text of 2 U.S. 396 (Hollingsworth v. Adams) 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
Hollingsworth v. Adams, 2 U.S. 396, 1 L. Ed. 431, 2 Dall. 396, 1798 U.S. LEXIS 159 (1798).
Opinion
HOLLINGSWORTH
versus
ADAMS.
Supreme Court of United States.
Thomas and Hallowell, on behalf of the plaintiff, wished for time to enquire into the practice; but not being able on the next day to assign any satisfactory reason in maintenance of the action.
THE COURT directed the writ to be quashed with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Lovejoy v. Hartford Fire Ins.
11 F. 63 (N.D. Illinois, 1882)
Folwell v. Beaver
13 Serg. & Rawle 311 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1825)
Bishop v. Dexter
2 Conn. 419 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1818)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
2 U.S. 396, 1 L. Ed. 431, 2 Dall. 396, 1798 U.S. LEXIS 159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hollingsworth-v-adams-scotus-1798.