M'IVER'S LESSEE
v.
WALKER ET AL.

U.S. | 1819-02-01
4 Wheat. 444 Supreme Court of the United States (1819) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 4 L. Ed. 611 · 1819 U.S. LEXIS 322 · SCDB 1819-028
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

A dispute over property rights in Tennessee was reviewed by the Supreme Court, which had previously heard the case and reaffirmed its earlier judgment. The Court reversed the Circuit Court's judgment, finding that the jury instructions were erroneous, and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's interpretation of the applicable law.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Marshall

Mr. Chief Justice Marshall delivered the opi-March im. nioaof the Court. The Cotirt has re-examined the opinion which it gave5 when this cause was formerly 'before it, and has not perceived any reason for changing that opin¡on< Nor do the new facts introduced into the cause, in any material degree, vary it. if there had been a settled course of decisions in Tennessee upon their local laws, different from the judgment pronounced by this Court, we should not hesitate to follow those decisions. But, upon an examination of the cases cited at the bar, we do not perceive that such is the fact. The judgment of the Circuit Court is, therefore, reversed, and the cause remanded for farther proceedings.

Judgment. — This cause came bn to be heard on the transcript of the record, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, it is the opinion of this Court, that the Circuit Court erred in the instructions given to the jury: it is, therefore, Adjudged and Ordered, that the judgment of the Circuit Court for the District of East Tennessee, in this - cause, be, and the same is, hereby reversed and annulled. And it is further ordered, that the said cause be remanded to the said Circuit Court for farther proceedings to be had therein, according to law.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Texas, 162 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1896)
    …ertained. 1 Kent Com. 174. Por that purpose the map to which the contracting parties referred is to be given the same effect as if it had been expressly made a part of the treaty. McIver’s Lessee v. Walker, 9 Cranch, 173; McIver's Lessee v. Walker, 4 Wheat. 444; Noonan v. Lee, 2 Black; 499; Cragin v. Powell, 128 U. S. 691, 696; Jefferis v. Omaha Land Co., 134 U. S. 178, 194. But are we justified, upon any fair interpretation of the treaty, in assuming that the parties regarded that map as absolutely correc…
  • State of Md. v. State of W. Va., 217 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1910)
  • Silver King Coal. Mines Co. v. Conkling Mining Co., 255 U.S. 151 (U.S. 1921)
    …rument evidencing the grant. See Resurrection Gold Mining Co. v. Fortune Gold Mining Co, 129 Fed. Rep. 668; Grand Central Mining Co. v. Mammoth [*163] Mining Co., 36 Utah, 364, 378, 379; Foss v. Johnstone, 158 California, 119, 128; McIver v. Walker, 4 Wheat. 444, 447, 448; Heath v. Wallace, 138 U. S. 573. We see no sufficient reason for disturbing the finding of the trial court, upon the facts. It may be that our decision will end this litigation. If not, our decree is made without prejudice to such furthe…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw