Blackwell v. Patten & Others, 3 L. Ed. 342 (1812). · Go Syfert
Search
Blackwell v. Patten & Others, 3 L. Ed. 342 (1812). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Walsh v. Dzurenda (nvd, 2021-08-24)
Treatment trajectory · 1900 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1900 1963 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Walsh v. Dzurenda
D. Nev. · 2021 · confidence medium
Rhines, 544 11 U.S. at 277; see also Wooten v. Kirkland, 540 F.3d 1019, 1023-24 (9th Cir. 2008). 12 Here, Walsh explains that in January 2021 he learned of a confidential informant 13 agreement that prosecutors suppressed in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 14 (1963).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Adam Yeoman v. William Pollard
7th Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
For these reasons, the Court held that “stay and abeyance should be available only in limited circumstances.” Rhines, 544 No. 15‐3489 11 U.S. at 277.
cited Cited "see" I.J.A. Inc. v. Marine Holdings Ltd.
E.D. Pa. · 1981 · signal: see · confidence high
See McKim v. Voorhies, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 279 , 3 L.Ed. 342 (1812), Diggs v. Wolcott, 8 U.S. (4 Cranch) 179 , 2 L.Ed. 587 (1807).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Albert Trostel & Sons Co. v. Notz
7th Cir. · 2012 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., M’Kim v. Voorhies, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 279 , 3 L.Ed. 342 (1812); Railway Co. v. Whitton’s Administrator, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 270 , 20 L.Ed. 571 (1872).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Blackwell
v.
Patten and Others
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 14, 1812.
3 L. Ed. 342
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

11 U.S. 277

7 Cranch 277

3 L.Ed. 342

BLACKWELL
v.
PATTEN AND OTHERS.

March 13, 1812

1

JONES, for the Defendants in error, moved this Court to dismiss the writ of error, because it bore teste of February term, 1810, was issued in September, 1810, and was returnable to February term, 1811, whereas it ought to have been tested of August term, 1810. The Plaintiff in error, aware of this objection, has sued out another writ of error, which stands on a subsequent part of the docket.

2

CAMPBELL, on the same side. August term is as much a term for teste and return of writs as February term. Suppose the writ bore teste ten years ago: it might as well be made returnable to February term, 1811, as this writ which bore teste of February term, 1810. If tested of February term, 1810, it ought to have been returnable to August term, 1810, and not to February term, 1811.

3

The appearance of the Defendants in error only cures the want of a citation, not a fault in the writ of error itself.

4

March 14th. All the Judges being present,

5

The COURT refused to quash or dismiss the writ of error on account of the irregularity of its teste.