Morris and Johnson v. United States

Supreme Court

Morris and Johnson v. United States

74 U.S. 578, 19 L. Ed. 281, 7 Wall. 578, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1040

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 15, 1869

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 74 U.S. 578 (Morris and Johnson v. United States) 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

Morris and Johnson v. United States, 74 U.S. 578, 19 L. Ed. 281, 7 Wall. 578, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1040 (1869).

Pincite

Opinion

The CHIEF JUSTICE

delivered the opinion of the court.

In procéeding to render a personal judgment against the defendants, for the value of the cotton, as found by it, the District Court erred.

Without adverting to the principles settled in the cases of the Union Insurance Company v. United States, * and Armstrong’s Foundry, † we are glearly of opinion — first, that the *580 information, at most, presents only a case of the unlawful conversion of property to the use of the appellants, and that for redress of such an inj ury this proceeding • by information cannot be sustained; and second, that neither the act of 1861 nor the act of 1862 contemplated any proceeding, as in admiralty, where there existed no specific property or proceeds capable of seizure and capture.

' The decree of the District Court must therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to the District Court to cause restitution to be made to the appellants of whatever sum of money they have been compelled to pay-under that decree.

*

6 Wallace, 763.

†

Ib. 769.

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

The CHIEF JUSTICE

delivered the opinion of the court.

In procéeding to render a personal judgment against the defendants, for the value of the cotton, as found by it, the District Court erred.

Without adverting to the principles settled in the cases of the Union Insurance Company v. United States, * and Armstrong’s Foundry, † we are glearly of opinion — first, that the *580 information, at most, presents only a case of the unlawful conversion of property to the use of the appellants, and that for redress of such an inj ury this proceeding • by information cannot be sustained; and second, that neither the act of 1861 nor the act of 1862 contemplated any proceeding, as in admiralty, where there existed no specific property or proceeds capable of seizure and capture.

' The decree of the District Court must therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to the District Court to cause restitution to be made to the appellants of whatever sum of money they have been compelled to pay-under that decree.

*

6 Wallace, 763.

†

Ib. 769.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 U.S. 578, 19 L. Ed. 281, 7 Wall. 578, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1040, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-and-johnson-v-united-states-scotus-1869.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack