List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 27

This is a list of cases reported in volume 27 (2 Pet.) of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1829.[1]

Supreme Court of the United States
Map
38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
EstablishedMarch 4, 1789; 234 years ago (1789-03-04)
LocationWashington, D.C.
Coordinates38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
Composition methodPresidential nomination with Senate confirmation
Authorized byConstitution of the United States, Art. III, § 1
Judge term lengthlife tenure, subject to impeachment and removal
Number of positions9 (by statute)
Websitesupremecourt.gov

Nominative reports edit

In 1874, the U.S. government created the United States Reports, and retroactively numbered older privately-published case reports as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of U.S. Reports have dual citation forms; one for the volume number of U.S. Reports, and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called "nominative reports").

Richard Peters, Jr. edit

Starting with the 26th volume of U.S. Reports, the Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States was Richard Peters, Jr. Peters was Reporter of Decisions from 1828 to 1843, covering volumes 26 through 41 of United States Reports which correspond to volumes 1 through 16 of his Peters's Reports. As such, the dual form of citation to, for example, Smith v. Foxall is 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 595 (1829).

Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) edit

The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[2] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).

When the cases in 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) were decided, the Court comprised these six justices (although a seventh justice, John McLean, was confirmed by the United States Senate in March 1829 after the death of Justice Robert Trimble, McLean did not take his seat on the Supreme Court until January 1830 and so did not participate in the decision of cases reported in 27 U.S. (2 Pet.)):

Portrait Justice Office Home State Succeeded Date confirmed by the Senate
(Vote)
Tenure on Supreme Court
  John Marshall Chief Justice Virginia Oliver Ellsworth January 27, 1801
(Acclamation)
February 4, 1801

July 6, 1835
(Died)
  Bushrod Washington Associate Justice Virginia James Wilson December 20, 1798
(Acclamation)
November 9, 1798
(Recess Appointment)

November 26, 1829
(Died)
  William Johnson Associate Justice South Carolina Alfred Moore March 24, 1804
(Acclamation)
May 7, 1804

August 4, 1834
(Died)
  Gabriel Duvall
Associate Justice Maryland Samuel Chase November 18, 1811
(Acclamation)
November 23, 1811

January 12, 1835
(Resigned)
  Joseph Story
Associate Justice Massachusetts William Cushing November 18, 1811
(Acclamation)
February 3, 1812

September 10, 1845
(Died)
  Smith Thompson Associate Justice New York Henry Brockholst Livingston December 9, 1823
(Acclamation)
September 1, 1823

December 18, 1843
(Died)

Notable Cases in 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) edit

Pennock v. Dialogue edit

In Pennock v. Dialogue, 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 1 (1829), the Supreme Court held invalid a patent on a method of making hose because the inventor had commercially exploited the invention for years before filing the patent application. The case has been cited many times for the proposition that the U.S. patent system was not established for the purpose of enriching inventors or their financiers but rather for the purpose of furthering the public interest by stimulating technological progress.[3]

Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. edit

Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co., 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 245 (1829), was a significant Supreme Court decision regarding the definition of the Commerce Clause in Article 1 sec. 8, cl. 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Willson, the owner of a sloop licensed under federal navigation laws, broke through a dam built by the Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. that blocked his passage. The company brought a case against Willson, claiming that Delaware authorized the building of the dam through a law which was passed under the police power of the state in order to clean up a health hazard, and there was no legislation by Congress dealing with the same subject matter. Willson claimed that the law authorizing the building of the dam was a violation of the Commerce Clause. He believed he had a constitutional right to navigate coastal streams, and Delaware's actions were motivated by private profits. Chief Justice John Marshall affirmed the lower court's decision, that because no federal law dealt specifically with the situation, and since the Delaware law did not violate Congress' Dormant Commerce Clause power, the state law was valid.

Citation style edit

Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.

Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.

List of cases in 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) edit

Case Name Page and year Opinion of the Court Concurring opinion(s) Dissenting opinion(s) Lower Court Disposition
Pennock v. Dialogue 1 (1829) Story none none C.C.D. Pa. affirmed
Columbian Insurance Company v. Lawrence 25 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D.C. reversed
Gardner v. Collins 58 (1829) Story none none C.C.D.R.I. certification
Williams v. Second Bank of the United States 96 (1829) Washington none none C.C.D. Ohio affirmed
Venable v. Second Bank of the United States 107 (1829) Story none none C.C.D. Ky. affirmed
Second Bank of the United States v. Corcoran 121 (1829) Washington none none C.C.D.C. affirmed
Jackson v. Twentyman 136 (1829) per curiam none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. dismissed
Van Ness v. Pacard 137 (1829) Story none none C.C.D.C. affirmed
Boyce v. Anderson 150 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D. Ky. affirmed
Thompson v. Tolmie 157 (1829) Thompson none none C.C.D.C. reversed
Townsley v. Sumrall 170 (1829) Story none none C.C.D. Ky. affirmed
Le Roy Bayard Company v. Johnson 186 (1829) Washington none none C.C.D.C. affirmed
Hunt v. Wickliffe 201 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D. Ky. reversed
Patterson v. Jenks 216 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D. Ga. reversed
Harper v. Butler 239 (1829) Marshall none none D. Miss. reversed
Powell's Lessee v. Harman 241 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D.W. Tenn. certification
Ritchie v. Mauro 243 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D.C. dismissed
Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Company 245 (1829) Marshall none none Del. affirmed
Foster v. Neilson 253 (1829) Marshall none none D. La. affirmed
Bank of Kentucky v. Wister 318 (1829) Johnson none none C.C.D. Ky. affirmed
Bank of Kentucky v. Ashley 327 (1829) Johnson none none C.C.D. Ky. affirmed
Second Bank of the United States v. Weisiger 331 (1829) Johnson none none C.C.D. Ky. reversed
Campbell's Executors v. Francis 354 (1829) Johnson none none C.C.D.C. affirmed
American Fur Company v. United States 358 (1829) Washington none none D. Ind. reversed
Dandridge v. Washington's Executors 370 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D.C. reversed
Satterlee v. Matthewson 380 (1829) Washington Johnson none Pa. affirmed
Reynolds v. McArthur 417 (1829) Marshall none none Ohio affirmed
Southwick v. Postmaster General 442 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. dismissed
Weston v. City of Charleston 449 (1829) Marshall none Johnson, Thompson S.C. Const. Ct. reversed
Second Bank of the United States v. Weisiger 481 (1829) per curiam none none C.C.D. Ky. decree entered
Mandeville v. Riggs 482 (1829) Story none none C.C.D.C. reversed
Bank of Hamilton v. Dudley's Lessee 492 (1829) Marshall none none Ohio affirmed
Second Bank of the United States v. Owens 527 (1829) Johnson none none C.C.D. Ky. certification
Second Bank of the United States v. Carneal 543 (1829) Story none none C.C.D. Ohio reversed
Canter v. American Ocean Insurance Company 554 (1829) Marshall none none not indicated motion overruled
Conolly v. Taylor 556 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D. Ky. affirmed
Beatty v. Kurtz 566 (1829) Story none none C.C.D.C. affirmed
Buckner v. Finley 586 (1829) Washington none none C.C.D. Md. certification
Smith v. Foxall 595 (1829) Thompson none none C.C.D.C. multiple
Chirac v. Reinecker 613 (1829) Story none none C.C.D. Md. reversed
Wilkinson v. Leland 627 (1829) Story none none C.C.D.R.I. reversed
Le Grand v. Darnall 664 (1829) Duvall none none C.C.D. Md. affirmed
Bank of Columbia v. Sweeny 671 (1829) Marshall none none C.C.D.C. affirmed
Beach v. Viles 675 (1829) Story none none C.C.D. Mass. affirmed

Notes and references edit

  1. ^ Anne Ashmore, DATES OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND ARGUMENTS, Library, Supreme Court of the United States, 26 December 2018.
  2. ^ "Supreme Court Research Guide". Georgetown Law Library. Retrieved April 7, 2021.
  3. ^ See, e.g., Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502, 511 (1917) ("Since Pennock v. Dialogue, 2 Pet. 1, was decided in 1829, this Court has consistently held that the primary purpose of our patent laws is not the creation of private fortunes for the owners of patents, but is 'to promote the progress of science and the useful arts.' ").

See also edit

External links edit