Robert Cooper Grier

Name: Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court
Author: Robert Cooper Grier

Summary

"Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court," authored by Justice Robert Cooper Grier, is a 19th-century legal opinion addressing jurisdictional conflicts, liens, and bankruptcy procedures within U.S. federal and state courts. The text examines the validity of attachments as security for plaintiffs, the extent of judicial authority over proceedings, and the interaction between state and federal legal systems.

Central themes include the enforceability of liens, the role of the sheriff in property seizures, and the boundaries of court intervention in bankruptcy matters. Grier’s analysis highlights the tension between procedural rights and the need for legal uniformity, concluding that statutory protections for liens must conform to broader judicial principles to prevent systemic contradictions.

Quotes from Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court (Robert Cooper Grier)

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ It is a doctrine of law too long established to require a citation of authorities, that, where a court has jurisdiction, it has a right to decide every question which occurs in the cause, and whether its decision be correct or otherwise, its judgment, till reversed, is regarded as binding in every other court; and that, where the jurisdiction of a court, and the right of a plaintiff to prosecute his suit in it, have once attached, that right cannot be arrested or taken away by proceedings in another court. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ Having thus shown that an attachment on mesne process creates a charge on the property attached in favor of the plaintiff, which is, in the language of the statutes and courts of New Hampshire, called a security and a lien, it will be unnecessary to notice arguments which have been urged against them on the ground of their peculiarities or distinctive features. The mere accidents of the subject cannot alter its essence. It is a statute lien, and therefore as much protected by the general language of the proviso as a common law lien. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ At common law there can be no lien without possession. It is there defined, a right in one man to retain that which is in his possession belonging to another, till certain demands of him, the person in possession, are satisfied. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ In order, therefore, to give full effect to all the provisions of the act, the bankrupt's certificate must be made to operate as a discharge of his person and future acquisitions, while, at the same time, the mortgagees or other lien creditors shall be permitted to have their satisfaction out of the property mortgaged or subject to lien. A legal right without a remedy would be an anomaly in the law. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ The acts of Congress point out but one mode by which the judgments of State courts can be revised or annulled, and that is by this court, under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act. In certain cases, where one of the parties is a citizen of another State, he has the privilege of removing his suit to the courts of the United States. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ In fine, we can find no precedent for the proceeding set forth in this plea, and no grant of power to make such decree or to execute it, either in direct terms or by necessary implication, from any provisions of the bankrupt act; and we are not at liberty to interpolate it on any supposed grounds of policy or expediency. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ If the plaintiff obtains a judgment, they are seized and sold upon the execution. If he fails, they are returned to the debtor. Some person may become accountable for them, and they may thus go back into the hands of the debtor, and the attachment be dissolved; the sheriff having, by means of a receipt for them, the security of some third person, which is in that case to be made available to the creditor. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ For if one may enjoin, the other may retort by injunction, and thus the parties be without remedy; being liable to a process for contempt in one, if they date to proceed in the other. Neither can one take property from the custody of the other by replevin or any other process, for this would produce a conflict extremely embarrassing to the administration of justice. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Robert Cooper Grier, Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court

“ This proposition is in harmony with the analogy which may be drawn from the English law of bankruptcy. Ex parte Pease, 19 Ves. 46; Ex parte Heath, Mon. & Bligh, 171; Ex parte Bocherley, 2 Glyn & Jam. 369; Ex parte Tindal, Buck, 305.
VIII. The order of the District Court can have no effect upon the rights of the parties before this court. The defendants in error were not parties to the proceeding before the District Court. The order is, in personam, against the sheriff and his deputy, and does not reach, or in any manner fasten upon, the property. Ramsey v. Eaton, 10 Mees. & Welsby, 22 ”

Robert Cooper Grier

Summary

Quotes from Peck v. Jenness — Opinion of the Court (Robert Cooper Grier)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature