Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

121 Mich. 259

Baldwin v. Baker

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 19, 1899

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1899-09-19

Bill by Stephen Baldwin against Fred A. Baker to compel the discharge of a mortgage. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals. The following are the allegations of the bill of complaint : Complainant purchased the land described in the bill of complaint, subject to a mortgage owned by defendant. December 13, 1897, there was due upon said mortgage $364.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1902

Relies on Legal Tender Cases Knox v. Lee Parker · Juilliard v. Greenman

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1899-09-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Grant, C. J.

¶1(after stating the facts). The sole question presented is whether the act in question, making the silver dollar of 412.5 grains troy of standard silver a full legal tender for all debts and dues, public and private, is constitutional. The learned counsel for the defendant have filed an elaborate brief upon the question, discussing the history of coinage in this country, and the various acts of Congress upon the subject. Did we not regard the question as foreclosed by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, we should be compelled to enter upon a studious and laborious examination of the subject. We are., however, of the opinion that that court, in the so-called “Legal Tender Cases,” has placed the question beyond discussion in other courts. Knox v. Lee, 12 Wall. 457; Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U. S. 444. Counsel argue that what was said in those cases affecting the questions they now raise was obiter dicta, and therefore not binding. We are of the opinion that the court in those cases fully covered the question. The language is clear and unmistakable. It appears conceded that it covers the question unless it is dictum. We must regard such holding as the deliberate and authoritative enunciation by the court of the law. We therefore decline to enter upon a discussion of the question, because, in our opinion, it is stare decisis. See Knox v. Lee, 12 Wall. 551-553. This case was subsequently approved by the nearly unanimous opinion of the same court in Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U. S. 438, only one justice dissenting.

¶2Decree affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.
/121/mich/259 · .json · Public domain