US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

PRESTON V. TREMBLE, 11 U. S. 354 (1813)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 11 U. S. 354 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Preston v. Tremble, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 354 354 (1813)

Preston v. Tremble

11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 354


Decided: that if an equitable title be merged in a grant, the party has no relief in equity, although the grant be void as being contrary to law.

Error to the Circuit Court for the District of East Tennessee, which had dismissed the plaintiffs bill in chancery upon demurrer for want of equity.

The bill stated that Preston, the complainant, had title to a tract of land in the State of Tennessee, but the defendant, Tremble, fraudulently and deceitfully entered into it and holds him out. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 11 U. S. 355

In setting forth the title, it is stated that the land formerly lay within the State of North Carolina, during which time, one Ephraim Dunlop made an entry for the land in regular form, paid the purchase money to the state, and performed every other requisite to complete the contract, but before a patent was obtained, the Legislature of North Carolina passed a law defining the limits of the Indian boundary, declaring all entries and surveys already made within those limits to be null and void and directing the entry-takers to refund all monies received therefor. That Dunlop never received back the purchase money, nor consented to annul the contract. That the law of North Carolina rescinding the contract was void. That Dunlop afterwards obtained a warrant to survey the land and obtained a patent therefor from the State of North Carolina, and afterwards conveyed the land to John Rhea, who conveyed to Preston, the plaintiff. chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 11 U. S. 356

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™