Francis West and Others, Appellants v. Walter Brashear, Appellee
Decision Date | 01 January 1840 |
Citation | 14 Pet. 51,39 U.S. 51,10 L.Ed. 350 |
Parties | FRANCIS WEST AND OTHERS, APPELLANTS, v. WALTER BRASHEAR, APPELLEE |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
ON appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky.
This case was before the Court on appeals from both the parties; and the proceedings and decision on the case are reported in 7 Peters, 608.
The proceedings in the Circuit Court of Kentucky, subsequent to the mandate issued from the Supreme Court, were the only matters in controversy on this appeal.
The mandate of the Supreme Court was as follows: 'Whereas, lately in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky, before you or some of you, in a cause between Walter Brashear, complainant, and Francis West, and John Lapsley, and Samuel Mifflin, and Henry Nixon, trustees of said West, and Thomas M. Willing and Henry Nixon, executors of John Nixon, deceased, defendants in Chancery, the decree of the said Circuit Court was in the following words, to wit:
'And whereas, at the present term of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-three, the said cause came on to be heard before the said Supreme Court on the said transcript of the record, and was argued by counsel, on consideration whereof this Court was of opinion that there is error in the decree of the said Circuit Court in allowing to the said Walter Brashear credit for the money paid by him as special bail for Francis West, at the suit of George Anderson, and also in refusing to allow the said Walter Brashear credit for the value of the ginseng shipped and sold by the said James Latimer, with the assent of the said assignees of Francis West, after the same had been attached in his hands by the said assignees: It is therefore decreed and ordered that the decree pronounced in this cause by the Court of the United States, for the seventh circuit, in the District of Kentucky, be reversed and annulled, and that the cause be remanded to that Court, with instructions to perpetuate the injunction as to the sum which shall be equal to the amount of the ginseng shipped and sold by the said James Latimer, after the attachment sued out by Francis West for the use of Samuel Mifflin, John Lapsley, and Henry Nixon, assignees for the benefit of his creditors, was levied, to dismiss the bill as to the residue; and it is further ordered that the parties pay their own costs in this Court.
'You, therefore, are hereby commanded, that such further proceedings be had in said cause, in conformity with the opinion and decree of this Court, as, according to right and justice, and the laws of the United States, ought to be had, the said appeal notwithstanding.'
The cause being before the Circuit Court on the mandate, in November, 1833, it was referred to a commissioner to state the accounts between the parties in conformity thereto; and general leave was also given to take the deposition of James Latimer.
Under this order of the Court, the commissioner made a report, and stated that he gave credit to Brashear, under date of May 11, 1809, for two thousand eight hundred and seventy-three dollars and fifty cents, the amount of ginseng shipped by Latimer and Redwood. On exceptions filed to this report, it was set aside by the Court, on account of a sufficient sum not...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. McGrew Coal Co. v. Ragland
... ... 4 C. J., p. 1211, sec. 3264; ... West v. Brashear, 14 Pet. 51, 10 L.Ed. 350, 39 U.S ... ...
-
State ex rel. McGrew Coal Co. v. Ragland
...or unexplained by any statements contained in an opinion filed with such mandate. 4 C.J., p. 1211, sec. 3264; West v. Brashear, 14 Pet. 51, 10 L. Ed. 350, 39 U.S. 51; Gamble v. Gibson, 10 Mo. App. 335; Sayman v. Becker, 269 S.W. 973; Wollman v. Loewen, 96 Mo. App. 299, 70 S.W. 253, Id. 108 ......
-
Wollman v. Loewen
...but if it were not, the opinion would disclose the reason why a new trial was ordered. Gamble v. Gibson, 10 Mo.App. 327, 335; West v. Brasher, 14 Pet. 51. In the opinion, other things, we said: "The evidence in this case shows conclusively that the relation which Loewen assumed to the notes......
-
Gaines v. Caldwell George Latta Gaines v. Caldwell Rugg
...extending only to executing the mandate.' This principle was applied, also, in Ex parte Story, 12 Pet. 339; Sibald v. U. S., Id. 488, West v. Brashear, 14 Pet. 51; Bank v. Moss, 6 How. 31, 40; Corning v. Nail Factory, 15 How. 451; Noonan v. Bradley, 12 Wall. 121, 129; Tyler v. Maguire, 17 W......