Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 87 (1810), is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision in which the Supreme Court first ruled a state law unconstitutional. The decision also helped create a growing precedent for the sanctity of legal contracts and hinted that Native Americans did not hold complete title to their own lands.
Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819), was a landmark decision in United States corporate law from the United States Supreme Court dealing with the application of the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution to private corporations. The case arose when the president of Dartmouth College was deposed by its trustees, leading to the New Hampshire legislature attempting to force the college to become a public institution and thereby place the ability to appoint trustees in the hands of the governor of New Hampshire. The Supreme Court upheld the sanctity of the original charter of the college, which pre-dated the creation of the State.
William Cranch was an American attorney and judge. He was notable for his role as the second reporter of decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States and his long tenure as a judge on the United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia.
United States v. Hudson and Goodwin, 11 U.S. 32 (1812), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that Congress must first enact a constitutional law criminalizing an activity, attach a penalty, and give the federal courts jurisdiction over the offense in order for the court to render a conviction.
Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. 267 (1806), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States first addressed the question of complete diversity. In a 158 word opinion the court held that for federal diversity jurisdiction under section 11 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, no party on one side of a suit may be a citizen of the same state as any party on the other side. Therefore, when there are joint plaintiffs or defendants, jurisdiction must be established as to each party. This requirement remains in law as a matter of statutory interpretation, not constitutional law.
Bailiff v. Tipping, 6 U.S. 406 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a citation must accompany a writ of error in order for the court to hear the case.
Fairfax's Devisee v. Hunter's Lessee, 11 U.S. 603 (1813), was a United States Supreme Court case arising out of the acquisition of Fairfax land in the Northern Neck of the state of Virginia by the family and associates of John Marshall, including Robert Morris. Because of the complexity of the conveyances of Fairfax land prior to the acquisition, litigation was almost bound to arise even in the absence of questions arising under the Peace Treaty.
United States v. Schooner Peggy, 5 U.S. 103 (1801), was a United States Supreme Court case. It was one of a series of cases resolving disputes over ships captured during the undeclared war between the United States and France from 1798 to 1800. The vessel was ordered returned to France.
Resler v. Shehee, 5 U.S. 110 (1801), was a United States Supreme Court case that involved judicial discretion on whether to hear appeals filed late.
United States v. Hooe, 5 U.S. 318 (1803), is a case of the Supreme Court of the United States. It was a case that hinged mainly on procedural issues relating to the documents that must accompany an appeal from courts within the District of Columbia.
United States v. Simms, 5 U.S. 252 (1803), was a United States Supreme Court case. It was one of a series of cases dealing with the applicability of previous laws in the newly created District of Columbia.
Capron v. Van Noorden, 6 U.S. 126 (1804), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court allowed a plaintiff to dismiss a case that he had lost at trial because of a lack of diversity jurisdiction, leaving the plaintiff free to bring the case again.
Cargo of the Brig Aurora v. United States, 11 U.S. 382 (1813), involved a forfeiture statute that Congress passed with a condition. The 1809 trade prohibition against Great Britain was to be reinstated in 1810 unless the President declared, by proclamation, that Great Britain was no longer violating the neutrality of the United States. The defendant argued unsuccessfully that such a conditional law unconstitutionally delegated congressional legislative authority to the President. The Court unequivocally upheld "reviving the act...either expressly or conditionally, as their judgment should direct."
United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, More held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction.
The Taney Court heard thirty criminal law cases, approximately one per year. Notable cases include Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842), United States v. Rogers (1846), Ableman v. Booth (1858), Ex parte Vallandigham (1861), and United States v. Jackalow (1862).
