Brudenell v. Vaux
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- Armstrong v. Carson (Supreme Court of the United States 1794)
- Guaranty Trust and Safe Deposit Co. v. Green Cove Springs and Melrose Railroad (Supreme Court of the United States 1891)
- Guaranty Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Buddington, Wilson & Co. (Fla. 1891)
- Union Bank of Georgetown v. Forrest (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia 1827)
- Moore v. Houston (Pa. 1817)
- Commonwealth v. Chambre (Pa. 1794)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
BRUDENELL et al.
versus
VAUX et al.
Supreme Court of United States.
Present WILSON and PETERS, Justices.
Lewis & Tilghman, for the plaintiff. Ingersoll, Rawle, & Thomas, for the defendant.
THE question in this cause arose upon the act of Assembly for recording Mortgages (1 Vol. Dall. Edit. p. 112) the mortgage of the defendants having been recorded after the expiration of six Lunar, but within six Calendar, months, from the date: And THE COURT, having compared this, with other acts of the Legislature, were of opinion, that by the word "months," Calendar months were intended.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.