Peyton v. Veitch
2 D.C. 123
Opinion
[125]*125Bills of exception were taken, but no writ of error prosecuted.
Upon the question whether the illegality of the payment should prevent the plaintiff from recovering, the defendants’ counsel cited 1 Esp. N. P. 89, 21 and 23; Mabin v. Colson, 4 Dall. 298; Belding v. Pitkin, 2 Caines, 147; and the plaintiff’s counsel cited Holman v. Johnson, Cowp. 341; Digges v. Lawrence, 3 T. R. 454; Waymell v. Reed, 5 T. R. 599, and Esp. N. P. 20, Am. Ed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Peyton v. Veitch, 2 D.C. 123 (circtddc 1816).
2 D.C. 123 (Peyton v. Veitch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Maybin, Surviving Partner, &C. v. Coulon. (A) Coulon v. Maybin, Surviving Partner, &C
4 U.S. 298 (Supreme Court, 1804)
Belding v. Pitkin
2 Cai. Cas. 147 (New York Supreme Court, 1804)