Supreme Court of the United States, 1873

Harrell v. Beall

Harrell v. Beall
Supreme Court of the United States · Decided November 24, 1873 · Miller, Dayis
84 U.S. 590; 21 L. Ed. 692; 17 Wall. 590; 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1401 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Harrell, propria persona, argued his case, orally, and filed a brief of .his own, and also one of Mr. A. T. Akerman. , Ho opposing counsel.

Harrell v. Beall

Opinion

Mr. Justiee MILLER

delivered the opinion of the court*

The appellant has furnished a brief and an oral argument which-have received the attentive consideration of the court. There is no appearance here for the appellee, and this has made us more careful in the examination of the record.

The question is wholly one of-the weight of evidence, involving no controverted proposition of law; and the pressure of business on this court will not justify u§ in reproducing in -our opinion the facts on which our judgments rest in such cases. It must suffice to say that we are-convinced that the sale to Echols was a barefaced fraud, and that if the appellee did -not know it when he purchased ofEchols it was because he intentionally shut his eyes to the truth, and that he had such notice and information as made it his duty to iüquiré further, and that the slightest effort by him in that direction would have discovered the whole fraud.

Such were the views on which the decree below was fqunded,-and it is accordingly

Affirmed.

Dissenting, Mr. Justice DAYIS.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.