Case Name: Charles A. Williamson and Catharine H. Williamson, his Wife, Plaintiffs, v. The Irish Presbyterian Congregation of the City of New York
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1850-01
Citations: 8 How. 565
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles A. Williamson and Catharine H. Williamson, his Wife, Plaintiffs, v. The Irish Presbyterian Congregation of the City of New York.
Judges: Mr. Chief Justice TANEY, Mr. Justice CATRON, and Mr. Justice NELSON dissented. See the report of the preceding case.
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 565–566

Head Matter:
Charles A. Williamson and Catharine H. Williamson, his Wife, Plaintiffs, v. The Irish Presbyterian Congregation of the City of New York.
The principles established in the preceding case of Williamson and Wife v. Berry applied to this case..
The circumstance, that the defendants paid to the grantees of George De Grasse a valuable consideration for the premises in dispute, does not give them a valid title against the plaintiffs.
This case was similar to the preceding one, in which the same facts and principles were involved. The only difference between them was, that the following point was certified in this case, which was not in the preceding, viz.: —
8. Whether the defendants, who derive title bond fide, and for'a valuable consideration, by purchase through the grantees of George De Grasse, as set forth in the case, have a valid title as against the plaintiffs.
It was argued in conjunction with the preceding case, as has been mentioned in the report of that case.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice WAYNE
delivered the opinion of the court.
In this case the points certified to this court are identical with those certified in the case of Williamson and Wife v. Joseph Berry, except the eighth. We direct that our rulings in that case shall be sent to the Circuit Court, as our answers to the points certified in this case. And further rule to the eighth point certified in this case, that the defendants, having paid to the grantétes of George De Grasse a valuable consideration for the premises in dispute, do not thereby acquire a valid title against the plaintiff's.
Mr. Chief Justice TANEY, Mr. Justice CATRON, and Mr. Justice NELSON dissented. See the report of the preceding case.