About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Philip H. De Lane, John M. Chiles, Martha Chiles, John E. Lykes, and Grace A. Lykes, Appellants, v. Andrew B. Moore, and James L. Goree, Executors of James L. Goree, deceased U.S. 253 (1853)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0232 and id is 1 raw text is: DECEMBER TERM, 1852. 253 :De Lane e. al. v. Moore et al. admission which has been brought to bear upon this transaction, related to a posterior and wholly different liability of the same parties - to a transaction in which Hicks and Arnold had depo- sited a certificate of deposit of this bank as collateral security for a debt from Arnold, and that security turning out not to be available, they held themselves bound to satisfy the demand it was designed to secure. This subsequent transaction had no connection whatever with that in which the check in question was given, and on which payment idi money was proffered, but for which the certificate of deposit was, by express agreement of the agent, ratified by his principal, taken in full satisfaction. Order. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi, and was argued by counsel. On con- sideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged, by this court, that the judgment of the said Circuit Court in this cause be, and the same is hereby, reversed with costs, and that this cause be, and the same is hereby, remanded to the said Circuit Court, with directions to award a venire facias-de wovo. PHILIP H. DE LANE, JOHN l. CHILES, IMARTHA C. CHILES, JOHN E. LYKEs, AND GRACE A. LYKES, APPELLANTS, V. ANDREW B. MOORE, AND JAMiSS L. GOREE, ExEcUTORS OF JAMES L. GO- REE, DpCEASED. Where an antenuptial contract was alleged to have been made, and the affidavits of the parties claiming under it alleged that they never possessed or saw it; that they had made diligent inquiry for it, but were unable to learn its present existence or place of existence; that inquiry had been made of the guardian of one of the children, who said that he had never been in possession of it, and did not know where it was; that inquiry had been made at the recording offices in vain, and that the affiants believed it to be lost; secondary proof of its contents ought to have been admitted. Whether recorded or not, it was binding upon the parties. If recorded within the time prescribed by statute, or if reacknowledged and recorded afterwards, notice would thereby have been given to all persons of its effect. If it was regularly recorded in one State, and the property upon which it acted was removed to another State, the protection of the contract would follow the property into the State into which it was removed. Put whcej' no suit was brought until eight or nine years after the death of the hus- band and then the one which was brought was dismissed for want of prosecution; another suit against the executors who had divided the property, comes too late. Tins was an appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Middle District of Alabama. VOL. XIV. 22

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most