1. Upon the death of a complainant in equity, only his legal representatives can revive
the suit. An assignee cannot appear. Barribeau v. Brant, 17 H. 43. ... 354.
2. Under the 61st rule of this court, where the representatives of a deceased complain-
ant and appellant did not appear after the lapse of two whole terms succeeding the
suggestion of his death, the suit was entered as abated. Ib.
ADMIRALTY, 1; EQUITY, 6. 7; TRUST.
1. An action of debt lies in the circuit court for Maryland, founded on a decree for
the payment of money made by a court of equity, of general jurisdiction, in the
State of New York. Pennington v. Gibson, 16 H. 65....30.
2. A railroad corporation, created by the State of Pennsylvania, and which built and
owned a railroad within that State, is liable in an action for the use of a patented
improvement on cars run on that road, though another corporation, created by the
State of Maryland, held all its stock, provided the cars, and worked the road, charg-
ing to the Pennsylvania corporation the expense of doing so, and crediting it with
the earnings on the road. York and Maryland Line Railroad Company v. Winans,
17 H. 30....350.
3. Under the laws of Virginia, an action on the case for a false representation as to the
credit of another, does not survive against the defendant's executor. Henshaw v.
Miller, 17 H. 212....463.
CONTRACT; DECEIT; JUDGMENT, &c. 3; MASTER AND SERVANT; REVENUE
LAWS, 14; SHIPS, &c. 1.
1. The admiralty has not jurisdiction over an account between the agent of a steamer
and its owners, for moneys paid to their use. Minturn v. Maynard, 17 H. 477....
2. There is not jurisdiction in admiralty to foreclose a mortgage of a vessel by a sale,
or by transfer of the possession to the mortgagee. Bogart v. Steamboat John Jay,
17 H. 399....5.72.
COLLISION, 6; COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 12–15.
ADMIRALTY, 1; MASTER AND SERVANT.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 13; EQUITY, 18.
1. A cross-bill should be disposed of in connection with the original bill; and a decree,
dismissing a cross-bill alone, is not final, and no appeal therefrom, lies. Ayres v.
Carver, 17 H. 591....708.
2. An appeal does not supersede the execution of a decree of foreclosure by sale of
mortgaged slaves, unless a bond to secure the whole amount of the debt is given
within ten days after the date of the decree, though the property is in the hands of
a receiver. Stafford v. Union Bank of Louisiana, 16 H. 135....53.
BILL OF REVIEW, 3. 4; COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 11-15. 17.18; MANDAMUS,
1. If an award is within the submission, and contains the honest decision of the arbitra-
trators, after a full and fair hearing, a court of equity will not set it aside, for error
in law or fact. Burchell v. Marsh, 17 H. 344....540.
2. The case examined, and held not to show such excess of authority, or unfairness of
intention, or negligent consideration of the case, as should induce the court to inter-
fere. Ib.
1. When a debtor deposited with an attorney certain notes as security for claims against
him, then in the attorney's hands, and subsequently gave verbal directions to the
attorney to protect another creditor out of any balance which might remain, and the
attorney gave to this last-mentioned creditor the control of a judgment recovered on
one of the notes; held, that the creditor acquired an equitable interest in the judg-
ment, by the direction of the debtor to the attorney, and the action of the latter
thereon. Hinkle v. Wanzer, 17 H. 353....544.
2. Though the first purchaser of a chose in action, generally, has the better right, he
may lose his preference by laches, as, under the circumstances of this case, he was
held to have done. Judson v. Corcoran, 17 H. 612....727.
3. An assignment of a chose in action, by a father to his son, is not subject to the ob-
jection of champerty. Lewis v. Bell, 17 H. 616....731.
4. An assignment of a chose in action "in consideration of one dollar, and divers other
good considerations," when attempted to be impeached by the representative of the
assignor, may be supported by evidence of valuable and adequate consideration. Ib.
5. A question of fact as to the assignment of a judgment in whole or in part. Rhodes
v. Farmer, 17 H. 464....613.
ABATEMENT, 1; CONTRACT, 3; COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 9. 10;
COVENANT, 2.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1-3; COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 1.
1. Where a bankrupt, having a valid claim for a large sum, on the government of
Mexico for the seizure of a vessel and cargo, was making efforts to obtain its allow-
ance and payment before and after his bankruptcy, but gave no information concern-
ing it to his assignee, and inserted in his schedule no allusion to it except "Mexican
Republic subject to a mortgage." Held, that a purchase by him of all his effects for
a nominal sum, from his assignee, in the name of a third person, at an auction sale
held under an order of the court in bankruptcy, was fraudulent and void. Clark v.
Clark, 17 H. 315....520.
2. The assignee being dead and no other appointed, held, that a bill by a creditor in
behalf of himself and all other creditors, to which the new assignee, when appointed,
made himself a party, filed within the time required by the eighth section of the act
of March 3, 1849, (9 Stats. at Large, 394,) was in compliance with that act, and the
circuit court for the District of Columbia could adjudicate on the title to the fund.
Ib.
3. The eighth section of the bankrupt act, (5 Stats. at Large, 446,) limits actions to
recover property, &c., against a claimant other than the bankrupt. Ib.
BILL OF LADING.
SHIPS, &c. 1.
1. Whether certain evidence, alleged to be newly discovered, would authorize a bill of
review. Southard v. Russell, 16 H. 547.... 296.
2. Merely impeaching the character of a material witness is not sufficient. 1b.
3. For errors in law, on the face of decree of an appellate court, a bill of review does
not lie. Ib.
4. Nor for any cause, after an appeal, without leave of the appellate court. 1b.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY NOTES.
1. A mistake in the christian name of the acceptor, in a copy of a bill of exchange
inserted in the protest, the other descriptive particulars being sufficient to identify
the bill, does not vitiate the protest. Dennistoun v. Stewart, 17 H. 606....722.
2. It is not a defence to an action on a bill of exchange by an indorsee for value,
against the acceptor, that the bill was drawn for work and labor done, and the ac-
ceptance made on the faith of the drawer's promise to make good certain defects in
the work, which he had failed to do; though the indorsee had notice of these facts
before he took the bill. Arthurs v. Hart, 17 H. 6....338.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 9. 10; Law and Fact.
1. If a balance was due from an officer when reappointed, the presumption is that it
was then in his hands, and if so his sureties, on his reappointment, are responsible
for its due application. But they may relieve themselves, by showing that he was
in fact a defaulter when they became his sureties. Bruce v. United States, 17 H.
437....596.
2. The recital of an appointment in a bond, estops the obligors from denying it, and it
is not necessary to produce the commission of the officer or its copy. 1b.
APPEAL, 2; MANDAMUS, 3. 4; Writ of Error, 2.
BURDEN OF PROOF.
MASTER AND SERVANT, 4.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 16-18; PUBLIC LANDS, 14-18; REVENUE
CASES AFFIRMED, EXPLAINED, &c.
1. United States v. King, et al. 7 How.
663, affirmed, and applied to this case.
2. The decision in 16 How. 135, affirmed.
H. 275....505.
833, and Same v. Turner's Heirs, 11 How.
United States v. Coxe, 17 H. 41....353.
Stafford v. Union Bank of Louisiana, 17
3. United States v. Buford, 3 Pet. 29, and Same v. Jones, 8 Pet. 376, explained.
Bruce v. United States, 17 H. 437....596.
4. Stephens v. Cady, 14 How. 528, reconsidered and affirmed. Stevens v. Gladding,
17 H. 447....604.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3; Courts of the United States, 14; Mandamus, 4;
CHAMPERTY.
ASSIGNMENT, 3.
DEVISE, &c. 2; PARTIES, 1.
CHARTER-PARTY.
SHIPS, &c. 4.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 6-8.
|