TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Dodge

The United States of America against Dodge and others

United States v. Dodge, 14 Johns. 95 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1817)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
January 15, 1817
Citations
14 Johns. 95
Headnotes
Bonds given for duties to the CT» nited States, may be sued in the state courts, which have (by the judiciary act of the United Slates) with the courts of the United States, oiall-uita at common law, where me States
Summary
THIS was an action of debt on a bond, given by the for the payment of duties to the collector of the district of Champlain. The bond was given in the form prescribed by the act of congress for the collection of duties, passed the 2d of March, 1799. The only question was, whether this court had jurisdiction of the cause. The case was submitted to the court without argument.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

The question submitted in this case is, whether this court has jurisdiction of the action. We are not able to *96 cover where any doubt can exist upon this question. The action is upon a bond given by the defendants to the Uni1cd~ Stai~s, conditioned for the payment of certain duties, and is in the form prescribed by the act of congress. (Sess. 3. 5th Cong. ch. 128. s. 62.) On failure of payment of the duties, bonds thus taken are directed to be prosecuted (sec. 65.) in the proper courts having cognizance thereof. By the act to establish the judicial courts of the United States, (sess. 1. 1st Cong. ch. ~O. s. 9. and 11.,) it is declared, that the courts of the several states shall have cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the United States, of all suits at common law, where the United States are plaintiffs in the suit. Judgment must, accordingly, be for the plaintifi~.

Judgment for the plaintiffs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1827–1828: 11829–1830: 11839–1840: 11845–1846: 21849–1850: 11875–1876: 118272026peak 1845 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Graff67 Barb. 304 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1875)
  2. Stearns v. United States22 F. Cas. 1188 (1840)
  3. Moffat v. Soley17 F. Cas. 559 (1827)
  4. Morrison v. Underwood20 N.H. 369 (1850)
  5. Ward v. Jenkins51 Mass. 583 (1846)
  6. In re Sheazle21 F. Cas. 1214 (1845)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Graff67 Barb. 304 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1875)
  2. Morrison v. Underwood20 N.H. 369 (1850)
  3. Ward v. Jenkins51 Mass. 583 (1846)
  4. In re Sheazle21 F. Cas. 1214 (1845)
  5. Stearns v. United States22 F. Cas. 1188 (1840)
  6. Vannini v. Paine3 Del. Cas. 211 (Del. Ch. 1829)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list