green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
14.3 score
G Cite
cited 4× by 3 distinct cases, 1995–2013 · 2 courts ·
…the construction of a written evidence is exclusively with the court
⚠ not in text
Topic ↗
Treatment trajectory · 1900 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1900
1963
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Louis A. Burgess v. United States
the construction of a written evidence is exclusively with the court
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Douglas R. Bigelow Trust v. United States
the construction of a written evidence is exclusively with the court
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.
(2×)
the construction of a written evidence is exclusively with the court
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Nunez v. Gamboa
(Id. at 63: “When the door was closed 21 and the lights were off and they thought they were safe in their little beds asleep and the 22 defendant would come in in the middle of the night, take their clothes off, and have his 23 way with them, that’s the monster.”) In order to rise to the level of a due process 24 violation, “the prosecutors’ comments [must have] ‘so infected the trial with unfairness 25 as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.’” Darden v. Wainwright, 477 26 U.S. 168, 181 (1986), quoting Donnelly v. DeChristoforo, 416 U.S. 637, 643 (1974); se…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
MTGLQ Investors v. Wellington
Co. v. Swasey, 90 U.S. 405, 409 (1874) (same, adding that “[t]he sale in such a case is the execution of the decree”); Ray v. Law, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 179, 180 (1805) (stating that “a decree for a sale under a mortgage[] is such a final decree as may be appealed from”).3 3 In a split decision, the Seventh Circuit has concluded otherwise, holding that a foreclosure judgment was not final under § 1291 because (1) the owner of the property retained statutory rights to redeem or reinstate the mortgage before a judicial sale; (2) if a judicial sale occurred, it would need to be confirmed in …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
MTGLQ Investors v. Monica Wellington
Co. v. Swasey, 90 U.S. 405, 409 (1874) (same, adding that “[t]he sale in such a case is the execution of the decree”); Ray v. Law, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 179, 180 (1805) (stating that “a decree for a sale under a mortgage[] is such a final decree as may be appealed from”). 3 3 In a split decision, the Seventh Circuit has concluded otherwise, holding that a foreclosure judgment was not final under § 1291 because (1) the owner of the property retained statutory rights to redeem or reinstate the mortgage before a judicial sale; (2) if a judicial sale occurred, it would need to be confirmed in…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
HSBC Bank USA v. Kirkland Townsend
The Court had applied the same rule long before Whiting, holding simply that “a decree for a sale under a mortgage, is such a final decree as may be appealed from.” Ray v. Law, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 179, 180 (1805).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Citibank, N. A. v. Data Lease Financial Corporation
In Ray v. Law, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 179, 179-80 , 2 L.Ed. 404, 404 (1805), Chief Justice Marshall stated that [t]he act of Congress points out the mode in which we are to exercise our appellate jurisdiction, and only authorizes an appeal or writ of error on a final judgment or decree....
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Brown Shoe Co. v. United States
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
At the same time, the record supports the court's conclusion that individual plants generally produced shoes in only one of the product lines the court found relevant. [43] See generally Bock, Mergers and Markets, An Economic Analysis of Case Law 25-35 (1960). [44] United States v. E.
discussed
Cited "see"
McClurg Family Farm, LLC v. United States
See Levy v. Gadsby, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 180, 186 , 2 L.Ed. 404 (1805) ("the construction of a written evidence is exclusively with the court”); Goddard v. Foster, 84 U.S. (17 Wall.) 123, 142 , 21 L.Ed. 589 (1872) ("[I]t is well-settled law that written instruments are always to be construed by the court_”); see also Meredith v. Picket, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 573, 575 , 6 L.Ed. 163 (1824) (interpreting a deed, "[t]he Judges must construe the words of an entry, or any other title paper, according to their own opinion of the words as they are found in the instrument itself”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Burgess v. United States
See Levy v. Gadsby, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 180, 186 , 2 L.Ed. 404 (1805) ("the construction of a written evidence is exclusively with the court”); Goddard v. Foster, 84 U.S. (17 Wall.) 123, 142 , 21 L.Ed. 589 (1872) ("[I]t is well-settled law that written instmments are always to be construed by the court_”); see also Meredith v. Picket, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 573, 575 , 6 L.Ed. 163 (1824) (interpreting a deed, “[t]he Judges must construe the words of an entry, or any other title paper, according to their own opinion of the words as they are found in the instrument itself”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
RSS WFCM2018-C44 - NY LOD, LLC v. 1442 Lexington Operating DE LLC
Once a judgment of foreclosure and sale is entered, it is generally final “because all that remains to be done is executing the judgment to enforce the rights and obligations that have been adjudicated.” HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Townsend, 793 F.3d 771 , 784– 85 (7th Cir. 2015) (Hamilton, J., dissenting); see also Ray v. Law, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 179, 180 (1805); Whiting v. Bank of U.S., 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 6, 15 (1839).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Standish v. Jackson (In re Albertson)
See, e.g., Levy v. Gadsby, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 180, 180 , 2 L.Ed. 404 (1805); Riddle & Co. v. Mandeville & Jamesson, 20 F.Cas. 756, 756 (C.C.D.D.C.1802) (No. 11,807), aff'd sub nom.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ray
v.
Law
v.
Law
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 18, 1805.
C. Lee, for the petitioner,
Marshall.
Cited by 46 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Federal Circuit (2) · Federal Claims (2)
Marshall, Ch. J.
We can do nothing, without seeing the record, and the papers offered cannot be considered by us as a record. „ _ *The court, however, is of opinion, that a decree for a sale under a -* mortgage, is such a final decree as may be appealed from. We suppose, that when the court below understands that to be our opinion, it will .allow an appeal, if it be a case to which this opinion applies.