Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold Book Reviews

Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold by United States Supreme Court Book Summary

Mr. Washburne referred to the cases of Frisby v. Ballance 2 Gilman, 141, and Frink v. Davit, 14 Illinois Reports, 304; and contended that the last decision had declared the law of the State, by which the deed of Bogardus to Underhill did not, by the subsequently-acquired title of Bogardus, pass the title in fee. The decision of the Circuit Court should be reversed, as being contradictory to the established law of the State. Mr. Ballance admitted that the United States courts could follow the State courts in the construction of their own statutes, and, when a new construction was adopted, could change and decide cases as they might arise, according to the new construction. But he denied that the Supreme Court could gather up all the old cases which had been settled under the law as it then stood, and make them conform to the new law.

👋 Do you love Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold books? Please share your friends!

Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold (United States Supreme Court) Book Reviews 2024

United States Supreme Court - Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold Discussions & Comments

Have you read this book yet? What do you think about Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold by United States Supreme Court book? Ask the bookpedia.co community a question about Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold!