O'Neale v. Long

Supreme Court

O'Neale v. Long

8 U.S. 60, 2 L. Ed. 550, 4 Cranch 60, 1807 U.S. LEXIS 366

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedFebruary 14, 1807

StatusPublished

Cited by14 cases

This text of 8 U.S. 60 (O'Neale v. Long) 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

O'Neale v. Long, 8 U.S. 60, 2 L. Ed. 550, 4 Cranch 60, 1807 U.S. LEXIS 366 (1807).

Pincite

Opinion

Marshall, Ch. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court, that there was error in this, that the court below did not instruct the jury as prayed by the defendant. He observed, that the judges did not all agree upon the same grounds, some being of opinion, that the bonds were void, by reason of the interlineation, and others, that they were vacated by the rejection of them by the magistrate, and could not be set up again, without a new delivery.

Judgment reversed, with costs.

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

Marshall, Ch. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court, that there was error in this, that the court below did not instruct the jury as prayed by the defendant. He observed, that the judges did not all agree upon the same grounds, some being of opinion, that the bonds were void, by reason of the interlineation, and others, that they were vacated by the rejection of them by the magistrate, and could not be set up again, without a new delivery.

Judgment reversed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 U.S. 60, 2 L. Ed. 550, 4 Cranch 60, 1807 U.S. LEXIS 366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneale-v-long-scotus-1807.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack