Cases

The question propounded to us and argued is, *Page 118 whether an interest in the capital of the residuary estate vested, absolutely, in the legatees named and described in the twelfth clause of the will, upon the death of the testator, to be divided and distributed among them at the end of twenty years? or, whether the interest in that residue was contingent, and dependent upon the legatees being alive at the end of twenty years? The law favors th

449 F.Supp.2d 992 (2006) Barbara SCHWAB et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Lorillard Tobacco Co., Ligget Group, Inc., American Tobacco Co., Altria Group, Inc., British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd., Defendants. No. 04-CV-1945(JBW). United States District Court

Chief Justice Ewihg delivered the opinion of the Court. The owners of the steamboat Bob Letcher filed their bill in the Louisville Chancery Court, to attach the steamboat Hard Times, to answer damages sustained by the former boat, on a charge that she had been run into and sunk on the Ohio river on her downward trip from Frankfort to Louisville, by the Hard Times, in hei ascending course on the river. A jury wa

Judge Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court. These five cases grow out of three several bills filed in the Louisville Chancery Court, to enforce liens given by the charter of Louisville, for securing payment for improving the streets of the city, from the proprietors of lots adjacent to the parts improved. In each of the three cases, the bill was dismissed as against the lot owners, and a decree rendered

Wood, J., (after stating the facts). It appears by the preamble to the contract under review that the appellee had already constructed a railroad across lands belonging to the appellant, and that there was a controversy between appellee and appellant as to whether or not the appellee had any authority to build this railroad, and it was recited that the controversy between the parties was detri

TRIEBER, District Judge. This is an action to foreclose a deed of trust in the nature of a mortgage executed by the defendant to secure the payment of certain notes of the defendant, payable to A. B. Newman, which notes it is alleged in the complaint were executed for the purchase money of the property conveyed by the deed of trust. The defense is that the indebtedness is tainted with usury and is therefore, under the Constitu

Page, J.: The testator died on January 6, 1910. The provisions of the will of which a construction is sought are the following: The testator devised and bequeathed two-thirds of his residuary estate to his executors in trust to pay to his wife all the net income thereof during her life, and upon her death to be divided as follows: “ 1. A one undivided one-half part of said portion of my estate so he

The principal object of this suit is to procure from the court a construction of the twelfth clause of the will of the late Robert Rogers, and, if the construction given will admit of it, a decree directing an immediate division of the property devised and bequeathed by the twelfth clause among the persons beneficially entitled to it. By the fourth clause of the will the testator gives his wife for life, and in lieu of dower, the income of certain stocks, which are nominally of the val

Mr. Justice Morris delivered the opinion of the Court: Both of these cases involve the question of the extent of the jurisdiction of justices of the peace in the District of Columbia and of the right of appeal from their judgments. In the case of United States, ex rel. the Brightwood Railway-Company v. O’Neal, a petition was filed in the Supreme Court of the District of Colum

DAYTON, District Judge (sitting specially). This suit was instituted in 1905, in the Circuit Court of Cabell county, West Virginia, for two purposes: First, to compel Minerva Phelps Russell administratrix of the estate of John Hooe Russell, to account for the proceeds of the property of the Huntington Distilling Company which are alleged to have gone into his hands under a certain written assignment made by said distilling compa

Tilghman C.. J. This case was very well argued. Every thing that ingenuity and industry could produce was brought before the court. If the case had been entirely new, it would have been extremely difficult to decide. But although no authority directly in point has been produced, yet some principles have been established by adjudged cases, which bear strongly on the question before us. It seems to have been formerly taken for daw

Shaw, C. J. This is an action of contract, brought by John A. Blanchard and others, constituting the firm of Blanchard, *282Converse & Co., merchants of Boston, against Rufus K. Page and others, owners of the ship St. Peters, to recover damage for a loss on goods delivered to the defendants at Boston, to be carried, for a stipulated freight, to New Orleans. The ship w

The Chief Justice informed Mr. Birdseye, that the Court had examined the question during their recess ; that Mr. B. was fully supported by Meredith v. Hinsdale, if that were now to be received as law; but the current of author*510ity, since the decision of that case, had been uniform and unbroken, that the lex loci contractus governs only as to the construction of the

Breese, J. I concur in so much of the opinion delivered as establishes the practice in relation to considering substantial objections to depositions; but, much as I respect their judgment, in nothing more. I might admit that the decision of Chancellor Kent, in the case of The Trustees of the Methodist Episcopal Church v. Jaques, 3 Johns. Ch. 77, though not law even for the State in which it was made, is

Chew, President. The counsel for the plaintiffs in error, in their arguments before us, have contended, *61that the judgment of the Supreme court is erroneous; and ought to be reversed for various reasons. 1 Bunb 17, 313. 1 Str. 187. Cowp. 423-4. 2 T. Rep.472,694 3 T. Rep. 5. 4 Burr.2035. 1. Because, the Admir

Radcliff, J. This was an' insurance on the freight of the Astrea, from New York to Corunna, in Spain, The policy was subscribed by the defendants on the 19 th November, 1798, in consequence of a written representation from the plaintiff, stating the ship, freight and cargo to be his property. The plaintiff was originally a subject of the United Netherlands and continued so until the 3d January, 1793, when he wa

Mr. Justice CURTIS dissenting. I dissent from the opinion pronounced by the Chief Justice,” afid from the judgment which the majority of. the court'think it proper to render in this ■ case. The plaintiff alleged, in his declaration, that he was a citizen of the State of Missouri, and that the' defendant was a citizen of the State-of New York. ■ It "is not doubted that it was necessary to make each of these' allega

In the original bill the lumber company were sole plaintiffs. Their complaint is, that they annually exercise the public right of floating logs down Connecticut river, and that the defendants *Page 377 have obstructed the way by a dam at Olcott falls. The prayer is for a decree restraining the defendants from maintaining the dam without suitable sluice-ways; for a provision in the decree determining the dimensions and character of the sluice-ways; and for

Wkeeleb, T. The Revised Laws of the state of Vermont define who shall be deemed a peddler, and provide that “no person shall be deemed a peddler by reason of selling articles of goods, wares, or merchandise, which are the manufacture of the state, except plated or gilded wares, jewelry, clocks, and watches;” that no person shall be licensed as a peddler who has not resided in the state one year next preceding the application for