TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Penrose v. Hart

Penrose versus Hart

Penrose v. Hart, 1 Dall. 378 (1788)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · State Trial Courts
Decided
December 15, 1788
Judges
Shippen
Citations
1 Dall. 3781 U.S. 378
Summary
On a rule to shew cause why the Judgement confessed by warrant of Attorney in this case Should not be opened, Fisher stated that several partial payments had been made by the Defendant, which the Plaintiff had applied first to the discharge of the arrearages of interest; whereas he insisted, that it ought first to have been deducted from the principal debt. insifted that the practice was the same at the present day, and appealed to the Attornies in Court, who confirmed his assertion- *

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

Opinion of the Court — Shippen

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

But Shippen, President,

said, that the practice had been otherwise; and he thought with great reason and propriety. He remembered to have heard of an old decision when Logan was Chief Justice, in which it was expressly settled, that money paid on account of a bond, should first be applied to discharge the interest due at the time of the payment, and the residue, if any, credited towards satisfaction of the principal. By this rule, the Gentlemen of the Bar had uniformly governed their calculations before the Revolution.

How later courts describe this case

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

1818–1819: 11820–1821: 11844–1845: 11848–1849: 12026–2027: 118182026peak 1818 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Dean v. Williams17 Mass. 417 (1821)
  2. Hart v. Dorman2 Fla. 445 (1849)
  3. Spires v. Hamot8 Watts & Serg. 17 (1844)
  4. Fitch v. Ross4 Serg. & Rawle 557 (1818)
  5. James David Kline v. City of TucsonNo. 4:26-cv-00018 (D. Ariz. Apr. 9, 2026)

Most recent

  1. James David Kline v. City of TucsonNo. 4:26-cv-00018 (D. Ariz. Apr. 9, 2026)
  2. Hart v. Dorman2 Fla. 445 (1849)
  3. Spires v. Hamot8 Watts & Serg. 17 (1844)
  4. Dean v. Williams17 Mass. 417 (1821)
  5. Fitch v. Ross4 Serg. & Rawle 557 (1818)

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