OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Dehon v. Bernal/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
70 U.S. 774
Dehon v. Bernal
1. When the United States and the claimant to whom a Mexican grant has been confirmed are both satisfied with its location, we think that any other person who seeks to contest such a location must show some title, legal or equitable, to some part of the land covered by the survey, before the court will disturb it at his instance. And though the District Court may, upon slight showing, permit a person to intervene to protect any interest he may have, we are of opinion that, on the hearing, he must show some title, legal or equitable, to the land in dispute, before the court is justified in disturbing the survey in his interest. In the present case, the court did modify the survey, so as to exclude all the land to which the appellant showed such title.
2. The survey conforms as nearly to the decree confirming the grant as it can well be made to do. It is true that the location as made by the surveyor places the northern boundary of the lot some distance south of the arroyo; but, as all the prescribed elements of location cannot be complied with, we do not see how it can be located more in conformity with the decree than it is.
And as the appellant has not shown that he is prejudiced by the survey as it is confirmed by the District Court, its decree is AFFIRMED WITH COSTS.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Deitrick v. Greaney

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
309 U.S. 190
Deitrick v. Greaney
Argued: Jan. 10, 1940. --- Decided: Feb 12, 1940
See 309 U.S. 697, 60 S.Ct. 611, 84 L.Ed. --.
Mr. George P. Barse, of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Mr. David Stoneman, of Boston, Mass., for respondent.
Mr. Justice STONE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Degraffenreid v. McKellar

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Marshall
United States Supreme Court
494 U.S. 1071
Degraffenreid v. McKellar
No. 89-6126
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Degraffenreid v. McKellar/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Marshall
Denied.
Justice MARSHALL, with whom Justice BRENNAN joins, dissenting.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Dehon v. Bernal

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
70 U.S. 774
Dehon v. Bernal
APPEAL from a decree of the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of California, confirming a survey of a Mexican grant.
The appeal was not taken by the United States, nor by the claimant whose grant was confirmed, but by one Dehon, who was permitted to intervene in the District Court, on the ground that the survey covered land in which he was interested. He asserted that the survey covered land owned by him under a deed from Bishop Allemany. The Allemany grant had been confirmed, surveyed, and patented, and was found to cover a part of this survey as first made. To the extent of the interference, the District Court modified this survey. But the intervenor was still dissatisfied, and appealed to this court, because, as he said, it covers other land which he claims, and also because it was erroneously located.
While exhibiting a number of deeds, Dehon, however, did not show any interest in the land covered by the modified survey, derived either from the government of Mexico or that of the United States.
The decree confirming the grant described the lot as a lot two hundred varas square, lying on the south side of an arroyo or stream, sixty varas from the northwestern corner of the Mission of Dolores; the northeast corner of the lot being one hundred and fifty varas from the northeast corner of the Mission. The arroyo was found, and the Mission is well known. It was impossible, however, so to locate the lot as to make the arroyo its northern boundary, and bring its northeast corner within any reasonable approximation to the distance stated from the northeast corner of the Mission. Under these circumstances, the surveyor located it so that the northeast corner of the lot was one hundred and sixtyone varas from the northeast corner of the Mission, and the lot was fifty-five varas from the northwest corner of the Mission. This placed the northern boundary of the lot some distance south of the arroyo.
Mr. D.B. Eaton for the appellant; Mr. Cope, contra.
Mr. Justice MILLER delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# David Kaufman Sons Company v. Smith

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
216 U.S. 610
David Kaufman Sons Company v. Smith
Argued: February 28, 1910. --- Decided: March 7, 1910
Messrs. Frederick B. Campbell, George Whitefield Betts, Jr., George W. Hinckley, and Wallace, Butler, & Brown for plaintiff in error.
Solicitor General Bowers and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lloyd for defendant in error.
Per Curiam:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# David Kaufman Sons Company v. Smith/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
216 U.S. 610
David Kaufman Sons Company v. Smith
Argued: February 28, 1910. --- Decided: March 7, 1910
It is established that to give this court jurisdiction on a direct appeal from, or writ of error to, a circuit court, on the ground of a constitutional question, such question must be real and substantial, and not a mere claim in words.
This was an action brought against the collector of customs for the recovery of duties paid under the act of March 2, 1905, 33 Stat. at L. 843, chap. 1311, entitled, 'An Act Fixing the Status of Merchandise Coming into the United States from the Canal Zone, Isthmus of Panama,' providing 'that all laws affecting imports of articles, goods, wares, and merchandise, and entry of persons into the United States from foreign countries, shall apply to articles, goods, wares, and merchandise, and persons coming from the Canal Zone, Isthmus of Panama, and seeking entry into any state or territory of the United States or the District of Columbia.'
Plaintiff claimed that the merchandise in question was not liable to the duties thus paid, but the circuit court ruled that, in view of the treaty between the Republic of Panama and the United States [33 Stat. at L. 2234], and the various acts of Congress relating to such zone, the principles laid down in Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 45 L. ed. 1088, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 770, were decisive of the questions raised herein. We concur in that conclusion, and dismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction.
Writ of error dismissed.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# David Lupton's Sons Company v. Automobile Club of America

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
225 U.S. 489
David Lupton's Sons Company v. Automobile Club of America
Argued: December 20, 1911. --- Decided: June 7, 1912
Messrs. William Ford Upson and William Forse Scott for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 490 intentionally omitted]
Mr. William W. Niles for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 491-493 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Hughes delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# David Munro Rogers v. Clark Iron Company/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
217 U.S. 589
David Munro Rogers v. Clark Iron Company
Writ of Error dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The case is reported below in 104 Minn. 198, 116 N. W. 739, where the facts are set forth at length. We hold that no Federal question was decided either by express terms or by necessary implication, and that the attempt to raise a Federal question was made in this court for the first time, which was too late.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# David Irving v Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt/XIV

XIV. VERDICT
14.1 It follows that there must be judgment for the Defendants.
# David Munro Rogers v. Clark Iron Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
217 U.S. 589
David Munro Rogers v. Clark Iron Company
Mr. John B. Richards for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. John G. Williams, Joseph B. Cotton, William R. Begg, and Frank B. Kellogg for defendants in error.
Per Curiam:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Beauchamp, William de

​BEAUCHAMP, WILLIAM de (d. 1260), baronial leader and judge, succeeded his father, Simon de Beauchamp, lord of Bedford, in 1207-8. He took part in John's expedition to Poitou (1214), but joined the baronial host at Stamford, Easter 1216 (M. Paris, 253-5), and entertained them at Bedford as they marched on London. He was among the baronial leaders excommunicated by name 16 Dec. 1215 (ib. 227), and his castle was seized the same month by John's general, Fulk de Bréaute, who was allowed to retain it. Belonging to the extreme party, he fought with them at Lincoln (19 May 1217), and was there taken prisoner by the royal forces (M. Paris), but made his peace before the end of the year (Claus. 1 Hen. III, m. 4). On the capture and destruction of Bedford Castle in 1224 [see Bréaute, Fulk de], the site was restored to him (Claus. 8 Hen. III, m. 7 dors.; cf. Royal Letters, 1085). He acted as sheriff of Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire 1234-7, and on 6 July 1234 was appointed a baron of the exchequer, in which capacity he reappears in 1237. He seems to have attained an unusual age, dying, according to Foss, in 1262, but according to the 'Annals of Dunstable ' (p. 215), which are probably right, in 1260. His younger son John fell at Evesham (T. Wykes), having succeeded his brother William shortly before.
J. H. R.
# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Beauchamp, Walter de (d.1236)

​BEAUCHAMP, WALTER de (d. 1236), judge, was son and heir of William de Beauchamp, lord of Elmley, Worcester, and hereditary castellan of Worcester and sheriff of the county. A minor at his father's death, he did not obtain his shrievalty till February 1216 (Pat. 17 John, m. 17). Declaring for Louis of France on his arrival (May 1216), he was excommunicated by the legate at Whitsuntide, and his lands seized by the Marchers (Claus, 18 John, m. 5). But ​hastening to make his peace, on the accession of Henry, he was one of the witnesses to his reissue of the charter (11 Nov. 1216), and was restored to his shrievalty and castellanship (Pat. 1 Hen. Ill, m. 10). He also Attested Henry's 'Third Charter,' 11 Feb. 1225. In May 1226 and in January 1227 he was appointed an itinerant justice, and 14 April 1236 he died (Ann. Tewk. 101), leaving by his wife (a daughter of his guardian, Roger de Mortimer), whom he had married in 1212, and who died in 1225 (Ann, Worc. 400), a son and heir, William, who married the eventual heiress of the earls of Warwick, and was grandfather of Guy, earl of Warwick [see Beauchamp, Guy de].
J. H. R.
# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Beauchamp, Walter de (fl.1415)

​BEAUCHAMP, Sir WALTER de (fl. 1415), lawyer and soldier, was the younger son of John de Beauchamp, of Powyke and Alcester, the grandfather of John, first Baron Beauchamp of Powyke. At first he studied the law, but afterwards distinguished himself as a soldier under Henry IV and Henry V in the French wars. Upon his return from France after the battle of Agincourt, he was elected knight of the shire for Wiltshire, and on 16 March 1415-16 was chosen speaker of the House of Commons. This office, however, Sir Walter did not hold long, as parliament was dissolved in the same year. He was employed as counsel by his relative, Richard Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, to argue his claim of precedency before the House of Commons. This quarrel between the Earl of Warwick and John Mowbray, earl marshal, which took up much of the time of the session of 1425, was terminated by the restoration of the forfeited dukedom of Norfolk to Mowbray. Sir Walter was married twice, first to Elizabeth, daughter and heiress of Sir Peter de la Mere; and secondly to Elizabeth, daughter and coheiress of Sir John Roche, knight. By this second marriage he had three children, one of whom, William, was, in 1449, summoned to parliament as fourth Baron St. Amand, in right of his wife, the great-granddaughter of Almeric, third Baron St. Amand. Another was Richard, bishop of Salisbury [see Beauchamp, Richard de, 1430?-1481].
G. F. R. B.
# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Beauclerk, Aubrey

​BEAUCLERK, Lord AUBREY (1710?–1741), captain in the royal navy, was the eighth son of Charles, first duke of St. Albans. After some previous service he was made post-captain on 1 April 1731, and appointed to the Ludlow Castle, which ship he commanded on the Leeward Islands station for about eighteen months. Through the years 1734-5 he commanded the Gafland in the Mediterranean, and in 1737-9 the Dolphin on the same station. He returned home in January 1739-40, and was almost immediately appointed to the Weymouth of 60 guns, from which, in the course of the summer, he was transferred to the Prince Frederick of 70 guns, one of the fleet which sailed for the West Indies with Sir Chaloner Ogle on 26 Oct. 1740. On the afternoon of one of the first days in January 1740-1, as the fleet was off the west end of Hispaniola, four large ships were sighted. The admiral signalled the Prince Frederick and five other ships of the line to chase. Towards dusk the strangers hoisted French colours, but did not shorten sail, and they were not overtaken till nearly ten o'clock. The Prince Frederick was the headmost ship, and Lord Aubrey hailed the ship he came up with, desiring her to heave to. As she neither did so nor answered his hail, he fired a shot across her bows; she replied with a broadside, and as the other ships came up a smart interchange of firing took place, after which they lay by till daylight. Their nationality was then apparent; they were really French ships, and the two squadrons parted with mutual apologies. The affair passed as a mistake, and probably was so on the part of the English. The fleet, under Sir Chaloner Ogle, arrived at Jamaica on 7 Jan. and joined Vice-admiral Vernon, under whose command it proceeded to Cartagena on the Spanish main. There, in the attack on the Boca Chica, Lord Aubrey was slain on 22 March 1740-1. A handsome monument to his memory was erected in Westminster Abbey, and a pension of 200l. per annum was conferred on his widow, which she enjoyed till her death on 30 Oct. 1755.
J. K. L.
# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Beauchamp, Richard de (1430?-1481)

1904 Errata appended.
​BEAUCHAMP, RICHARD de (1430?–1481), bishop of Salisbury and chancellor of the order of the Garter, was the son of Sir Walter Beauchamp [q. v.] and brother of William Beauchamp, Lord St. Amand. Of the date of his birth there is no record, but it was probably about the year 1430. For his elder brother, Lord St. Amand, first received summons to parliament in 1449 by reason of his marriage with the heiress of the old barons of St. Amand; and as early marriages were the rule in those days, he was probably not much over one-and-twenty when he took his seat in the House of Lords. Nothing, however, is known about Richard Beauchamp previous to the year 1448, when, being at that time archdeacon of Suffolk, he was nominated bishop of Hereford by Pope Nicolas V on 4 Dec. His consecration took place on 9 Feb. following. But he had only remained in this see a year and a half when he was translated by papal bull, dated 14 Aug. 1450, to Salisbury, and received restitution of the temporalities on 1 Oct. In 1452 his name appears for the first time in the register of the Garter as performing divine service at a chapter of the order at Windsor, which he did also in 1457 and 1459. It would thus appear that he acted occasionally as chaplain to the order long before he became their chancellor; for, as Anstis observes, he could not have claimed to officiate at Windsor as diocesan, the college being exempt from his jurisdiction. On 10 Oct. 1475 he was appointed chancellor of the order by patent of King Edward IV, the office being created in order to provide a more convenient custodian for the common seal of the brotherhood, which by the statutes was to be kept only by one of its members, who should be in attendance upon the king's person. From this time till his death he was present at most, if not all, the chapters of the Garter; and in 1478 the deanery of Windsor was given him, to hold along with his bishopric. He was installed on 4 March. He moreover procured the incorporation of the dean and canons of St. George's Chapel, Windsor, which was granted by patent of 6 Dec. 19 Edw. IV (1479). He died on 16 Oct. 1481, of what illness does not appear, and is said to be buried at Windsor. His will was proved on 8 Feb. 1482.
J. G.
Dictionary of National Biography, Errata (1904), p.19 N.B.— f.e. stands for from end and l.l. for last line
| Page | Col. | Line | |
| 31 | ii | 12 f.e. | Beauchamp, Richard de: for 16 Oct. read (according to Le Neve) 4 Nov. |
| | | 10 f.e. | after will insert dated 16 Oct. 1481 |
# Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Beauchamp, Robert de

​BEAUCHAMP, ROBERT de (d. 1252), judge, was a minor at the death of his father, Robert de Beauchamp, lord of Hatch, Somerset, in 1211-12. Adhering to John, he was appointed constable of Oxford and sheriff of the county towards the close ​of 1215, and received grants of land for his services to the king. He was raised to the bench by Henry III 6 July 1234, and appointed a justice itinerant in August 1234 and April 1238. He last appears as a judge in 1241-2, and died shortly before 1 Feb. 1251-2, when his son did homage for his lands.
J. H. R.
# Declaration of Henry Every to English ship commanders

as quoted in Baer, Joel H. (2005). Pirates of the British Isles. London: Tempus Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7524-2304-3.
    To all English Commanders lett this Satisfye that I was Riding here att this Instant in ye Ship fancy man of Warr formerly the Charles of ye Spanish Expedition who departed from Croniae ye 7th of May. 94: Being and am now in A Ship of 46 guns 150 Men & bound to Seek our fortunes I have Never as Yett Wronged any English or Dutch nor never Intend while I am Commander. Wherefore as I Commonly Speake wth all Ships I Desire who ever Comes to ye perusal of this to take this Signall that if you or aney whome you may informe are desirous to know wt wee are att a Distance then make your Antient Vp in a Ball or Bundle and hoyst him att ye Mizon Peek ye Mizon Being furled I shall answere wth ye same & Never Molest you: for my Men are hungry Stout and Resolute: & should they Exceed my Desire I cannott help my selfe.
    as Yett An Englishman's friend,
    At Johanna February 28th, 1694/5 Henry Every
    Here is 160 od french Armed men now att Mohilla who waits for Opportunity of getting aney ship, take Care of your Selves.
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Declaration of Independence

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Declaration of Independence."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* United States Declaration of Independence
* Declaration of Independence of California
* Declaration of Independence of the Czechoslovak Nation
* Declaration of Independence (Israel)
* 2008 Declaration of Independence of Kosovo
* Declaration of Independence of Liberia
* Declaration of Independence of Lower Canada
* The Declaration of Independence of the Northern Chiefs
* Unilateral Declaration of Independence (Rhodesia)
* Proclamation of the Czechoslovak independence by the National Committee
* Sukarno's Proclamation of Indonesian Independence
* Philippine Declaration of Independence