Long v. Oneale

1 D.C. 233
District Court, District of Columbia·Decided December 15, 1804·Published

Opinion

Cranch, J.,

was of opinion that the instruction prayed by Mr. Key ought to be given; but Kilty, C. J., being of a different opinion, and Fitzhugh, J., being absent, the instruction was not given.

The defendant took a bill of exceptions, and upon a writ of error, the judgment was reversed by the Supreme Court of the United States. See 4 Cranch, 60.

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

Long v. Oneale, 1 D.C. 233 (D.D.C. 1804).

1 D.C. 233 (Long v. Oneale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

O'Neale v. Long
8 U.S. 60 (Supreme Court, 1807)