Sutton v. Bancroft

Supreme Court

Sutton v. Bancroft

64 U.S. 320, 16 L. Ed. 454, 23 How. 320, 1859 U.S. LEXIS 774

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedFebruary 20, 1860

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 64 U.S. 320 (Sutton v. Bancroft) 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

Sutton v. Bancroft, 64 U.S. 320, 16 L. Ed. 454, 23 How. 320, 1859 U.S. LEXIS 774 (1860).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice GRIER

delivered the opinion of the court.

*321 The plaintifls in error were sued on a promissory note executed by them. They did not pretend to have any defence. They entered a false plea, which was. overruled on demurrer. They refused to plead in bar. Judgment was entered against them in due form, for want of a plea.

They do not pretend to allege any error in the proceedings. The judgment is therefore affirmed, with fen per cent, damages.

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

Mr. Justice GRIER

delivered the opinion of the court.

*321 The plaintifls in error were sued on a promissory note executed by them. They did not pretend to have any defence. They entered a false plea, which was. overruled on demurrer. They refused to plead in bar. Judgment was entered against them in due form, for want of a plea.

They do not pretend to allege any error in the proceedings. The judgment is therefore affirmed, with fen per cent, damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 U.S. 320, 16 L. Ed. 454, 23 How. 320, 1859 U.S. LEXIS 774, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutton-v-bancroft-scotus-1860.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack