James Peck, Et Al Appellants v. John Sanderson, Libellant
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | McLEAN |
| Citation | James Peck, Et Al Appellants v. John Sanderson, Libellant, 59 U.S. 42, 18 How. 42, 15 L.Ed. 262 (1855) |
| Decision Date | 01 December 1855 |
| Parties | JAMES B. PECK, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. JOHN SANDERSON, LIBELLANT |
THIS case was argued and decided at the last term, and is reported in 17 Howard.
Mr. Rush, of counsel for the appellee, now stated to the court that a petition from the appellee was on file, verified by affidavit, and moved for a rehearing, which was opposed by Mr. Wahr, counsel for the appellant.
This case was decided at the last term, on an appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Pennsylvania, and a motion is now made by Mr. Rush, counsel for the appellee, for a reargument, on the ground that he was prevented by sickness from attending the court at the time of the hearing.
It is a subject of regret that any cause should be heard in the absence of counsel, and especially where the cause of absence, by a failure in the mail, was unknown to the court.
In the above case, the brief of the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Carter Oil Co. v. Eli
...Am. Dec. 118; Delaplaine v. Bergen, 7 Hill (N.Y.) 591; Browder v. M'Arthur, 20 U.S. 58, 7 Wheat. 58, 5 L. Ed. 397; Peck v. Sanderson, 59 U.S. 42, 18 HOW 42, 15 L. Ed. 262; Underhill v. Jericho, 66 Vt. 183, 28 A. 879; Sullivan v. Speights, 14 S.C. 358; Caldwell v. Bruggerman, 8 Minn. 286 (Gi......
-
Sun Oil Co. v. Burford
...Ann.Cas. 1917D, 322. 4 Browder v. McArthur, 7 Wheat. 58, 5 L.Ed. 397; Sibbald v. United States, 12 Pet. 488, 9 L.Ed. 1167; Peck v. Sanderson, 18 How. 42, 15 L.Ed. 262; Williams v. Conger, 131 U.S. 390, 9 S.Ct. 793, 33 L.Ed. 201. 5 See dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Roberts, concurred in ......
-
Omaha Elec. Light & Power Co. v. City of Omaha
...Pet. 488, 9 L.Ed. 1167; Noonan v. Bradley, 12 Wall. 121, 125, 20 L.Ed. 279; Browder v. McArthur, 7 Wheat, 58, 5 L.Ed. 397; Peck v. Sanderson, 18 How. 42, 15 L.Ed. 262; Washington Bridge Co. v. Stewart, 3 How. 413, L.Ed. 658; Kingsbury v. Buckner, 134 U.S. 650, 671, 10 Sup.Ct. 638, 33 L.Ed. ......
-
Carter Oil Co. v. Eli
... ... Taylor Eli, James Eli, Charlotte Chuculate, T. P. Wilson, ... John ... Barry, of Oklahoma City, and Reynolds & ... appellants are Taylor Eli, James Eli, Charlotte Chuculate, ... M'Arthur, 7 Wheat. 58 (5 L.Ed ... 397); Peck v. Sanderson, 18 How. 42 (15 L.Ed ... 262); ... ...
-
REEXAMINING RECALL OF MANDATE: LIMITATIONS ON THE INHERENT POWER TO CHANGE FINAL JUDGMENTS.
...U.S. 413, 424 (1845); Browder v. McArthur, 20 U.S. 58, 58 (1822); Cameron v. McRoberts, 16 U.S. 591, 593 (1818). (25.) Peck v. Sanderson, 59 U.S. 42, 42 (26.) Id. The Court did note that Sanderson's absence of counsel was "a subject of regret." (27.) James Wm. Moore & Elizabeth B.A. Rog......