LINDENBERGER ET AL.
v.
BEALL
LINDENBERGER ET AL.
BEALL
6 Wheat. 104
Supreme Court of the United States (1821)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 5 L. Ed. 216 · 1821 U.S. LEXIS 344 · SCDB 1821-002
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Henderson v. Carbondale Coal & Coke Co., 140 U.S. 25 (U.S. 1891)
-
Rhett v. Poe, 2 How. 457 (U.S. 1844)
-
Dickins v. Beal, 10 Pet. 572 (U.S. 1836)…from his notarial book, and the protest made out at the time; from which, and his invariable practice, he presumed he had done so. This was held sufficient proof of such notice, and that it was unnecessary to. give notice to defendant to produce it. 6 Wheat. 104, 106. In Nichols'v. Webb, thfe notary was dead; but on a memorandum on the margin of the protest, it was stated in his handwriting, “Indorsee duly, notified in writing 19th July 1819, the last day of grace being Sunday the 18th;” which was held comp…