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.
Boyd versus Bopst, 1785 — 2 U.S. 91 · caselaw · US
General
Boyd versus Bopst
2 U.S. 912 Dall. 91·Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·1785·PA
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
September Term, 1785.
Boyd versus Bopst.
This cause was tried at Easton, N. P. on the 10th June, 1785, before the Chief Justice, and Rush, Justice.
[MAJORITY]
IN the charge to the Jury, the Court observed, that the maxim of Caveat Emptor only applied to real estates; as the purchaser had the means of examining the title within his own power. But the possession of chattels, is a strong inducement to believe, that the possessor is the owner; and the act of selling them, is such an affirmation of property, that, on that circumstance alone, if the fact should turn out otherwise, the value can he recovered from the seller.