Lewis Tappan plaintiff in error vs. John Beardsley and Horace Beardsley defendants in error : argument for plaintiff in error /

Lewis Tappan plaintiff in error vs. John Beardsley and Horace Beardsley defendants in error : argument for plaintiff in error /

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Author / Creator:	Butler, William Allen, 1825-1902. author
Imprint:	[Buffalo, NY] : William S. Hein and Company, [2007]
Description:	1 electronic text (68 pages) : PDF file.
Language:	English
Series:	HeinOnline world trials World trials library
Subject:	Tappan, Lewis, -- 1788-1873 -- Trials, litigation, etc. Beardsley, John -- Trials, litigation, etc. Beardsley, Horace -- Trials, litigation, etc. Trials -- United States. Trials (Libel) -- New York (State) -- Albany. Electronic books.
Format:	E-Resource Book
URL for this record:	http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/7298826

Hidden Bibliographic Details
Varying Form of Title:	At head of title: Supreme Court of the United States, no. 34
Other authors / contributors:	Tappan, Lewis, 1788-1873, plaintiff in error. Beardsley, John, defendant in error. Beardsley, Horace, defendant in error. O'Conor, Charles, 1804-1884. United States. Supreme Court.
Notes:	Title from PDF title page, viewed May 4, 2008. Print version published: New York : Russell's American Steam Printing House, 1871. Full text available with subscription to HeinOnline World Trials Library. Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Summary:	"A suit was commenced in September, 1849, by John and Horace Beardsley, of Norwalk, Ohio, against Lews Tappan, the then proprietor of the Mercantile Agency, for libel, claiming damages for $10,000. It was first tried November 1851, before a jury in the United States Circuit Court, New York, and verdict given in favor of Beardsley. A motion was made for a new trial before Judge Nelson, November, 1864, but a decision was not given till October, 1867, when the motion was denied and judgment entered up in favor of Beardsley. The suit had in the meantime been assumed by R.G. Dun & Co. and Dun, Barlow & Co., successors of Lewis Tappan. They appealed from Judge Nelson's decision to the Untied States Supreme Court, at Washington. The case came up for hearing December 14, 1870, and Charles O'Conor and william Allen Butler, on behalf of R.G. Dun & Co. made the following argument on the points submitted. The appeal resulted in reversing the decision of Judge Nelson."