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.
Maxwell's Lessee versus Levy, 1797 — 2 U.S. 381 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Maxwell's Lessee versus Levy
2 U.S. 3812 Dall. 381·United States Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania·1797
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
Maxwell’s Lessee versus Levy.
[MAJORITY]
EJECTMENT. On a rule to shew cause, why this ejectment, and many other cases depending on the same principle, should not be struck off the record, upon a suggestion that the Court had no jurisdiction, it-appeared, that the lessor of the plaintiff was a citizen of Maryland, resident there, and that the defendant was a citizen of Pennsylvania, resident here. But as soon as the ejectment was instituted, a bill for discovery was filed against the lessor of the plaintiff, on the equity side of the Court, in which it was alledged, “that the conveyance of the premises in controversy to the lessor of the plaintiff was made by Morris, a citizen of Pennsylvania, for no other purpose thato give jurisdiction to the Circuit Court ;" and the answer to the bill admitted; “ that the lessor of the plaintiff had given no consideration for the conveyance; that his name had been used by way only of accommodation to Morris” ; but it was not directly said, that it was for the purpose of creating a jurisdiction in the Federal Court.
After argument by M. Levy, for the plaintiff, and by T ilghman, for the defendant, Iredell, Justice, delivered opinion of the Court, in which the conveyance to the less the plaintiff was considered as entirely colorable and collusive ; and, therefore, incapable of laying a foundation for the jurisdiction of the Court.
The rule made absolute.
Anonymous