WASHINGTON COUNTY
v.
UNITED STATES EX REL. MORTIMER

U.S. | 1870-04-04
No. 137
19 L. Ed. 734 Supreme Court of the United States (1870) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 1870 U.S. LEXIS 1255 · SCDB 1869-196
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice Strong

Mr. Justice Strong delivered the opinion of the court.

This case differs in no essential particular from No. 133 decided at this term. For the reasons given in the opinion filed in that case this judgment must be affirmed.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is Affirmed with costs.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Biscayne Realty & Ins. Co. v. Ostend Realty Co., 109 Fla. 1 (Fla. 1933)
    …aw implies a promise to pay, notwithstanding there was no privity between the parties” (text 642). Equity always has jurisdiction of fraud, misrepresenta [*20] tion and concealment, and it does not depend on discovery. Jones v. Bolles, 9 Wall, 364, 19 L. Ed. 734. See Given v. Times-Republican Printing Co., 114 Fed. 92, 52 C. C. A. 40, for a clear statement of the doctrine of estoppel as applied to circumstances analogous to those in the present case. Will the Ostend Realty Company be heard to say that pro…
  • Wilhelm v. Consol. Oil Corp., 84 F.2d 739 (10th Cir. 1936)
    …567, 19 S.Ct. 817, 43 L.Ed. 1081; Twogood v. Allee, 125 Iowa, 59, 99 N.W. 288, 289; Baltimore Sugar Refining Co. v. Campbell & Zell Co., 83 Md. 36, 34 A. 369, 373; Nathan v. Nathan, 166 Mass. 294, 44 N.E. 221, 222; Jones v. Bolles, 9 Wall. 364, 369, 19 L.Ed. 734; Baltimore H. I. Soc. v. Marley, 156 Md. 478, 144 A. 521, 522. Massie v. Watts, 6 Cranch, 148, 159, 3 L.Ed. 181; Hart v. Sansom, 110 U.S. 151, 154, 155, 3 S.Ct. 586, 28 L.Ed. 101. See, however, Arndt v. Griggs, 134 U.S. 316, 320, 321, 10 S.Ct. 557,…
  • Stockman v. Fagan, 29 F.2d 440 (D.C. Cir. 1928)
    …law affords a complete remedy in damages. This objection is groundless. Equity has always had jurisdiction of fraud, misrepresentation, and concealment; and it does not depend on discovery.” Mr. Justice Bradley, in Jones v. Bolles, 9 Wall. 364, 369, 19 L. Ed. 734. The issue involving the household furniture is less certain, but it too enters into the settlement between the estate and the defendant, and may be heard together with it. “But equity will decree the delivery of chattels when such relief is incid…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw