John Marshall

Name: Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court
Author: John Marshall

Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by John Marshall. It explores elements such as survey, entry and equity.

Quotes from Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court (John Marshall)

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ Thus, no Court in the universe, which professed to be governed by principle, would, we presume, undertake to say, that the Courts of Great Britain, or of France, or of any other nation, had misunderstood their own statutes, and therefore erect itself into a tribunal which should correct such misunderstanding. We receive the construction given by the Courts of the nation as the true sense of the law, and feel ourselves no more at liberty to depart from that construction, than to depart from the words of the statute. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ But, the statute of limitations, which bars an ejectment after the lapse of twenty years, constitutes no bar to a writ of right, even where the tenant counts on his own seisin, until thirty years shall have elapsed. Whether a Court of equity considers an equitable claim to land as barred when the right of entry is lost, or will sustain a bill as long as the mere right may be asserted, is a question of some difficulty, and of great importance. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ The analogy of a bill in equity to actions founded on a right of entry, seems to derive some title to consideration, from the circumstance, that the plaintiff does not sustain his claim on his own seisin, or that of his ancestor, but on an equity not necessarily accompanied by seisin, whereas seisin is an indispensable ingredient in a writ of right. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ It is contended by the defendants, that this prohibition to give a copy of the plot and certificate of survey, excludes the idea of that notoriety which is ascribed to a record. Though inserted for preservation in a book which is denominated a book of record, it does not become, in fact, a record, until it shall partake of that characteristic quality of a record, on which the obligation to notice it is founded, being accessible to all the world. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ It was considered, and was treated by the Court, as one of the highest importance; and the opinion was unequivocally expressed, that 'both on principle and authority, the laches and non-claim of the rightful owner of an equitable estate, for a period of twenty years, (supposing it the case of one who must, within that period, have made his claim in a Court of law, had it been a legal estate,) under no disability, and where there has been no fraud, will constitute a bar to equitable relief, by analogy to the statute of limitations. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ In the very elaborate and very able opinion given by the Chancellor, in this case, in which he investigates thoroughly the principles which govern a Court of equity in its decisions on the statute of limitations, it is not insinuated that it acts in any case from analogy to a writ of right, but is assumed as an acknowledged and settled principle that it acts from analogy to a writ of ejectment. In this case, a suit had been instituted by John Bond, the grandfather of the plaintiff, as early as 1755, and a decree pronounced in 1770. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ An appeal was taken to the House of Lords, and in moving the judgment of the House, Lord Eldon adverted to the general principles adopted by Courts of equity on the subject of length of time, and observed on 'the vest difference between trusts, some being express, some implied; some, relations formed between individuals in the matter in which they deal with each other, and in which it could hardly be said, that one was trustee, and the other cestui que trust, and yet it could not well be denied, that for some purposes they were so. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ The defendants contend, that conflicting opinions have been given in the State, and that the question is still open; while the plaintiff insists, that the real question, that is, the notoriety of a survey after being made three months, has never been determined in the negative.
The first case of which we have any knowledge, is Sinclair v. Singleton, (Hughes, 92.) The decision of the Court was in favour of the validity of an entry which calls for the lines of a survey. The Court is not in possession of the book in which the case is reported ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Marshall, Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court

“ In addition to these observations, it may be proper to say, that the rule which requires that all persons concerned in interest, however remotely, should be made parties to the suit, though applicable to most cases in the Courts of the United States, is not applicable to all. ”

John Marshall

Summary

Quotes from Elmendorf v. Taylor — Opinion of the Court (John Marshall)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature