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.
Nathaniel Williams, as permanent Trustee for the Creditors of John Gooding, an Insolvent Debtor, v. Charles Oliver, Robert M. Gibbes, and Thomas Oliver, Executors of Robert Oliver, and John Glenn and David M. Perrine, Trustees, 1851 — 53 U.S. 125 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Nathaniel Williams, as permanent Trustee for the Creditors of John Gooding, an Insolvent Debtor, v. Charles Oliver, Robert M. Gibbes, and Thomas Oliver, Executors of Robert Oliver, and John Glenn and David M. Perrine, Trustees
53 U.S. 12512 How. 125·Supreme Court of the United States·1851
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
Nathaniel Williams, as permanent Trustee for the Creditors of John Gooding, an Insolvent Debtor, v. Charles Oliver, Robert M. Gibbes, and Thomas Oliver, Executors of Robert Oliver, and John Glenn and David M. Perrine, Trustees.
The decision in the preceding case of Williams, Trustee, v. Oliver’s Executors, again affirmed.
This case was also, like the preceding one, brought up from the Court of Appeals of Maryland, ,bv a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act.
The circumstances of the two cases were the same. In both, Winchester was the trustee who sold, the share to Oliver, and the same act of Assembly,applied to both. The judgment and reasons of the Court of Appeals covered both cases, and they were argued in this court together by the same counsel.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice NELSON]
Mr. Justice NELSON
delivered the opinion of the court.
This case involves the same principles as the case of Wil.liams, permanent Trustee of James Williams, already decided; and we refer to the opinion there delivered for our decision in this case.
The case is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Order.
This cause came on to be heard on- the transcript of the record from the Court of Appeals of the State of Maryland for the Western Shore, and was argued by counsel.- On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this court, that this cause be, and the same is hereby, dismissed, for the want of jurisdiction.