Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 U.S. 302

Brudenell v. Vaux

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April Term, 1794

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1794-04

2 counsel of record

Cited in Abbott (1879)’s definition of “Month” · Anderson (1889)’s definition of “Month”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1794-04

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1923

10 state decisions

5017941800181018201830184018501860187018801890190019101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Prefent Wilson and Peters, Justices

¶2Lewis is’ Tilghman, for the plaintiff.

¶3Ingerfoll, Rawle, & Thomas, for the defendant.

¶4THE queftion in this cause arose upon the act of Assembly for recording Mortgages. (1 Vol. Ball. Edit. p. 112) the mortgage of the defendants having been recorded after the expiration of fix lunar, but within fix 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-.

/2/us/302 · .json · Public domain