The Mayor v. Lindsey

Supreme Court

The Mayor v. Lindsey

86 U.S. 485, 22 L. Ed. 180, 19 Wall. 485, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1452

DecidedApril 18, 1874

StatusPublished

This text of 86 U.S. 485 (The Mayor v. Lindsey) 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

The Mayor v. Lindsey, 86 U.S. 485, 22 L. Ed. 180, 19 Wall. 485, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1452 (1874).

Pincite

Opinion

86 U.S. 485

22 L.Ed. 180

19 Wall. 485

THE MAYOR
v.
LINDSEY.

October Term, 1873

In error to the same Circuit Court, for the Middle District of Tennessee. In this case Lindsey sued the mayor of Nashville on certain checks, similar in all respects, in form and inception, to the check issued to Julius Sax, and mentioned more particularly supra, p. 472. The checks now sued on had been pledged as collateral security for a loan of less amount than the checks pledged, and were sold soon after being pledged, and before the loan fell due; the transaction being effected by the chairman of the finance committee of the city council without other authority. Such at least was the tendency of the evidence, and the judge charged substantially as in the preceding case of Ray.

Mr. Justice BRADLEY announced the judgment of this court, REVERSING THE JUDGMENT BELOW, with directions to award a

VENIRE DE NOVO.

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

86 U.S. 485

22 L.Ed. 180

19 Wall. 485

THE MAYOR
v.
LINDSEY.

October Term, 1873

In error to the same Circuit Court, for the Middle District of Tennessee. In this case Lindsey sued the mayor of Nashville on certain checks, similar in all respects, in form and inception, to the check issued to Julius Sax, and mentioned more particularly supra, p. 472. The checks now sued on had been pledged as collateral security for a loan of less amount than the checks pledged, and were sold soon after being pledged, and before the loan fell due; the transaction being effected by the chairman of the finance committee of the city council without other authority. Such at least was the tendency of the evidence, and the judge charged substantially as in the preceding case of Ray.

Mr. Justice BRADLEY announced the judgment of this court, REVERSING THE JUDGMENT BELOW, with directions to award a

VENIRE DE NOVO.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 U.S. 485, 22 L. Ed. 180, 19 Wall. 485, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-mayor-v-lindsey-scotus-1874.