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.
Town of Genoa v. Woodruff et al., 1875 — 92 U.S. 502 · caselaw · US
General
Town of Genoa v. Woodruff et al.
92 U.S. 50223 L. Ed. 586·Supreme Court of the United States·1875
Mr. Justice Miller, Mr. Justice Davis, and Mr. Justice Field, dissented.
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
Town of Genoa v. Woodruff et al.
1. The judgment in this case was affirmed upon the authority of Town of Venice v. Murdock, supra, p. 494.
2. The holder of a coupon is entitled to recover interest thereon from the time it fell due.
Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of New York.
Mr. H. L. Comstock for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. David Wright, contra.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Strong]
Mr. Justice Strong
delivered the opinion of the court.
Twenty-six errors have been assigned in this case, not one of which can be sustained. All which have the least plausibility have been considered and declared unfounded in Town of Venice v. Murdoch, supra, p. 494; and the others might well be dismissed without special notice. The thirteenth complains that the circuit judge decided that the plaintiffs could recover interest upon the coupons from the time they fell due. That the ruling was correct is perfectly plain. It was in entire accordance with the decisions generally of the State courts and also of this court.
The other assignments have either been answered in Town of Venice v. Murdoch, or they are totally without merit.
Judgment affirmed.
Mr. Justice Miller, Mr. Justice Davis, and Mr. Justice Field, dissented.