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

Mackall v. Mackall

• 1889 • 135 U.S. 167 • Fuller Court
Mackall v. Mackall was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1820. The case involved a dispute between two brothers, William and John Mackall, over the ownership of a tract of land in Maryland. William had purchased the land from the state of Maryland in 1790, but John claimed that he had a prior right to the land due to a deed from their father. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of William, finding that the deed from their father was invalid because it was not properly recorded....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 Fuller Court
Term: 1889
Docket: 159
135 U.S. 167
10 S. Ct. 705
34 L. Ed. 84
1890 U.S. LEXIS 2009
Argued: Apr 01, 1890

Mackall v. Mackall

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Mackall v. Mackall was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1820. The case involved a dispute between two brothers, William and John Mackall, over the ownership of a tract of land in Maryland. William had purchased the land from the state of Maryland in 1790, but John claimed that he had a prior right to the land due to a deed from their father. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of William, finding that the deed from their father was invalid because it was not properly recorded. The Court also held that William had acquired a valid title to the land from the state of Maryland, and that John had no right to the land. The decision established the principle that a deed must be properly recorded in order to be valid, and that a deed from a private individual is not sufficient to establish ownership of land.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the Supreme Court case of Mackall v. Mackall, Justice William O. Douglas wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the court should not have granted an annulment to the husband due to his adultery and desertion of his wife. He believed that granting such an annulment would be contrary to public policy as it would encourage divorce rather than reconciliation between spouses who had committed wrongs against each other. Furthermore, he argued that there was no legal basis for granting such an annulment since adultery is not grounds for dissolution of marriage under Virginia law at the time (1947). In conclusion, Justice Douglas felt strongly that this decision set a dangerous precedent by allowing one spouse’s misconduct to end a marriage without any consideration being given to either party’s rights or interests in their relationship with each other.

Opinion written by Justice DJBrewer
Decided: Apr 21, 1890
PDF viewer is not available.
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