Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
James Todd, Appellant, v. Otis Daniell, Defendant, 1843 — 42 U.S. 289 · caselaw · US
General
James Todd, Appellant, v. Otis Daniell, Defendant
42 U.S. 2891 How. 289·Supreme Court of the United States·1843
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
James Todd, Appellant, v. Otis Daniell, Defendant.
[MAJORITY]
An agreement in writing between the counsel, as .well for the appellant as for the appellee, that the decree of the Circuit'Court in this case shall be affirmed with legal damages and costs for the said Daniell, having been filed'; it is thereupon considered and decreed by this court, that the decree of the said Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed, with costs and damages, at the rate of 6 per centum per annum; and also that the said appellee recover of the said appellant, the further sum of $125 for the-costs of the transcript of the record in the Circuit Court according to the said agreement.