United States v. Gurney
This text of 26 F. Cas. 58 (United States v. Gurney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The replication is certainly double, as either non-payment on the day, or non-acceptance in satisfaction, is an answer to the plea, though perhaps not a legal one; but if not so. both together cannot be. They are perfectly distinct matters, 'and not the component parts of a plea. But, as this determination would require us to decide upon the validity of the bar set up to the plea, which is attended with great difficulty, we think it best to adjourn the cause to the supreme court, upon a disagreement of the judges; which, however, is not real.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
26 F. Cas. 58, 1 Wash. C. C. 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gurney-circtdpa-1806.