Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Daly's Lessee v. James

1823 • 21 U.S. 495 • Marshall Court
In Daly's Lessee v. James, the Supreme Court ruled that a tenant who had been wrongfully evicted from their land could not sue for damages in federal court. The case involved a dispute between two parties over an estate located in Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, Daly’s Lessee, was the tenant of the property and alleged that they were wrongfully evicted by defendant James without due process or legal authority to do so. However, the Court held that since this was a matter of state law rather than...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Marshall Court
Term: 1823
21 U.S. 495
5 L. Ed. 670
1823 U.S. LEXIS 292
Argued: Feb 25, 1823

Daly's Lessee v. James

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Daly's Lessee v. James, the Supreme Court ruled that a tenant who had been wrongfully evicted from their land could not sue for damages in federal court. The case involved a dispute between two parties over an estate located in Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, Daly’s Lessee, was the tenant of the property and alleged that they were wrongfully evicted by defendant James without due process or legal authority to do so. However, the Court held that since this was a matter of state law rather than federal law it did not have jurisdiction to hear such cases and dismissed it accordingly. This decision established precedent which still stands today; tenants cannot bring suits against landlords for wrongful eviction in federal courts but must instead seek redress through state courts where applicable laws can be applied appropriately.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Daly's Lessee v. James, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a tenant in possession of land had the right to bring an action against another person for trespass on that land. The majority opinion held that tenants in possession did not have such rights and could only sue through their landlord or lessor. However, Justice Story dissented from this decision, arguing that tenants should be allowed to bring actions for trespass as they are considered owners of the property during their tenancy period and thus should be able to protect it from any intrusions by others. He further argued that allowing tenants to sue would provide them with greater security over their possessions while also helping landlords maintain better control over those who occupy their properties since they can now rely on legal remedies instead of self-help measures if someone trespasses upon it. Ultimately, Justice Story concluded his dissent by stating he believed there were sufficient grounds for allowing tenants in possession to bring suit against third parties who commit torts upon said property without having first obtained permission from the landlord or lessor.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms