Search Supreme Court Cases
CLARKE V. HARWOOD, 3 U. S. 342 (1797)
U.S. Supreme Court
Clarke v. Harwood, 3 U.S. 3 Dall. 342 342 (1797)
Clarke v. Harwood
3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 342
ERROR TO THE HICH COURT OF
APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND
On a writ of error to the High Court of Appeals of Maryland, the judgment of that court was reversed and the judgment of the General Court of Maryland was affirmed. The mandate of this court was directed to the General Court, and the costs of this Court and of the courts of Maryland were allowed to the plaintiff in error.
This was a writ of error to the High Court of Appeals, of the State of Maryland, to remove the proceedings in a cause, involving a construction of the treaty of peace between the United States and Great Britain, which that court had decided against the title claimed under the treaty by reversing and annulling a previous judgment given in the General Court of the state in favor of the claim. The only objection arising on the record was whether a paper money payment of a British debt into the Treasury of Maryland during the war by virtue of a law of the state was a bar to the creditor's recovery at this time. And the solemn adjudication in Ware v. Hylton, ante, p. 3 U. S. 199, having settled that point, Dallas for the defendant in error submitted the case, without argument, to the Court, which in general terms reversed the judgment of the High court of Appeals and affirmed the judgment of the General Court.
It then became a question to which of the state courts the mandate should be sent and what costs should be allowed.
By the Court:
The judgment of the Superior Court of Maryland being reversed, it has become a mere nullity, and costs must follow the right as decided here.
Let the Judgment of the General Court be affirmed; let the costs in the courts of Maryland, and in this Court be allowed to the plaintiff in error, and let the mandate for execution issue to the General Court.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.