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

Moses E. Levy, Appellant v. Fernando De La Maza Arredondo And Juan De Entralgo, Appellees

1838 • 37 U.S. 218 • Taney Court
Moses E. Levy, appellant, brought a case against Fernando de la Maza Arredondo and Juan de Entralgo, appellees. The dispute was over the ownership of certain lands in Florida that had been granted to Levy by Spain prior to its cession of Florida to the United States. The Supreme Court held that although the grant from Spain was valid under Spanish law at the time it was made, it did not confer any title upon Levy since he could not have acquired any legal rights or interests in land within an...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 Taney Court
Term: 1838
37 U.S. 218
9 L. Ed. 1062
1838 U.S. LEXIS 354
Argued: Feb 06, 1838

Moses E. Levy, Appellant v. Fernando De La Maza Arredondo And Juan De Entralgo, Appellees

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Moses E. Levy, appellant, brought a case against Fernando de la Maza Arredondo and Juan de Entralgo, appellees. The dispute was over the ownership of certain lands in Florida that had been granted to Levy by Spain prior to its cession of Florida to the United States. The Supreme Court held that although the grant from Spain was valid under Spanish law at the time it was made, it did not confer any title upon Levy since he could not have acquired any legal rights or interests in land within an area which belonged to another sovereign power without its consent. Therefore, because no such consent had been given by either Spain or the United States when they entered into their treaty transferring sovereignty over Florida from one country to another, Levy's claim failed and his appeal was denied.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In this case, Moses E. Levy appealed the decision of a lower court that had ruled in favor of Fernando de la Maza Arredondo and Juan de Entralgo. The dispute centered around an 1822 contract between Levy and Arredondo for the purchase of land in Florida Territory. In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Levy argued that he was entitled to damages because he had been prevented from taking possession of the property due to Spanish military occupation at the time when title passed under their agreement. However, Chief Justice Taney wrote a dissenting opinion stating that since Spain still held sovereignty over Florida at the time when title passed under their agreement, it would be impossible for either party to have taken possession or exercised any rights with respect thereto until after Spain ceded its authority over Florida by treaty with United States in 1819-1821; thus making it impossible for either party to claim damages based on nonperformance prior thereto. Furthermore, Taney stated that even if there were grounds for claiming damages due to nonperformance before 1819-1821 then such claims should be addressed through diplomatic channels rather than through judicial proceedings as they are matters outside of U.S jurisdiction and beyond its power or control

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