President of the Bank of United States v. Haskins
1 Johns. Cas. 132
Opinion
Oh examining precedents, wé are satisfied, that whether the act of congress incorporating the bank of the United States be viewed either as a public or private act, it 'was not necessary to set fdith the act itself, nor the names of the individuals composing the company.
. Judgment for the plaintiffs.
Grays v. Turnpike Co., 4 Randolph, 57; 2 Cowen, 770; 14. Johns. R. 245; 5 Wend. 482. But see, 3 Conn. R. 199 ; 2 Virginia Cas. 297; 5 Randolph, 326. And see Angell & Ames on Corps, ch. 17, § 3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
President of the Bank of United States v. Haskins, 1 Johns. Cas. 132 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1799).
1 Johns. Cas. 132 (President of the Bank of United States v. Haskins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Hagar
52 Cal. 171 (California Supreme Court, 1877)
Odd Fellows Building Ass'n v. Hogan
28 Ark. 261 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1873)
Bennington Iron Co. v. Rutherford
18 N.J.L. 158 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1840)
Harris v. Muskingum Manufacturing Co.
4 Blackf. 267 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1837)
Bank of Michigan v. Williams
5 Wend. 478 (New York Supreme Court, 1830)
Silver Lake Bank v. North
4 Johns. Ch. 370 (New York Court of Chancery, 1820)
Dutchess Cotton Manufactory v. Davis
14 Johns. 238 (New York Supreme Court, 1817)