Williams v. Bank of United States
Cases that cite this one
26 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Mittry Bros. Const. Co. v. United States (9th Cir. 1934)
- Parker v. New England Oil Corp. (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1926)
- The Bylands (5th Cir. 1916)
- Provident Life & Trust Co. of Philadelphia v. Camden & T. Ry. Co. (3d Cir. 1910)
- Port v. Schloss Bros. & Co. (3d Cir. 1907)
- Kidder v. Fidelity Ins., Trust & Safe-Deposit Co. (7th Cir. 1901)
- Loveless v. Ransom (7th Cir. 1901)
- Babcock v. Norton (2d Cir. 1924)
- Priest v. Seaman (8th Cir. 1920)
- Clark v. Belt (8th Cir. 1915)
- Winters v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1908)
- Humes v. Third Nat. Bank (5th Cir. 1893)
- Hardee v. Wilson (Supreme Court of the United States 1892)
- Curten v. Atkinson (Neb. 1890)
- Estis v. Trabue (Supreme Court of the United States 1888)
- Guarantee Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Buddington, Wilson & Co. (Fla. 1887)
- Cameron v. Sheppard (Ga. 1883)
- Feibelman v. Packard (Supreme Court of the United States 1882)
- Case of the Sewing Machine Companies (Supreme Court of the United States 1874)
- Simpson v. Greeley (Supreme Court of the United States 1874)
- Railroad v. Johnson (Supreme Court of the United States 1873)
- Hampton v. Rouse (Supreme Court of the United States 1872)
- McClure v. Taylor (Ind. 1871)
- Masterson v. Herndon (Supreme Court of the United States 1870)
- Standley v. E. S. Jaffray & Co. (Fla. 1869)
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
stated, that the writ of error must be dismissed, it having issued irregularly. The judgment in thé Circuit. Court of Ohio was a joint judgment, upon a joint action for money lent, against three defendants; and the writ of error was sued out by one of the defendants, in his own name only, without joining the others. The Court was of opinion, that the writ of error ought to have been in the name of the three ; .and if the others should refuse to join in it, that it would deserve consideration whether the present plaintiff' might not have summons and severance.
Writ of error dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.