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.
General
Lathrop L. Sturgis, Plaintiff in Error, v. Christian Honold
60 U.S. 39319 How. 393·Supreme Court of the United States·1856
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
Lathrop L. Sturgis, Plaintiff in Error, v. Christian Honold.
The decision in the preceding case again affirmed.
This, like the preceding case, of which it constituted a branch, was brought up, by writ of error, from the Circuit Court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana.
It was similar in all respects to the preceding case, except that Honold purchased five-sixteenths of the ship from Sturgis, and four-sixteenths from Bulkley. The two cases'proceeded through the courts pari passu, and were argued together in this court.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice CURTIS]
Mr. Justice CURTIS
delivered the opinion of the court.
This case depends on the same facts and principles as the preceding case, and the judgment of the Circuit Court therein is affirmed.