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

The Star. -- Dickenson, Et Al. Claimants

1818 • 16 U.S. 78 • Marshall Court
The Star was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1818. The claimants, Dickenon et al., argued that they had been wrongfully denied compensation for their services on board the ship Star. They claimed that they were entitled to wages and other benefits as provided under maritime law. The court ultimately ruled against them, finding that there was no legal basis for their claims of entitlement to such payments or benefits. In its ruling, the court stated that it could not recognize...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: 1818
16 U.S. 78
4 L. Ed. 338
1818 U.S. LEXIS 350
Argued: Feb 11, 1818

The Star. -- Dickenson, Et Al. Claimants

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Star was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1818. The claimants, Dickenon et al., argued that they had been wrongfully denied compensation for their services on board the ship Star. They claimed that they were entitled to wages and other benefits as provided under maritime law. The court ultimately ruled against them, finding that there was no legal basis for their claims of entitlement to such payments or benefits. In its ruling, the court stated that it could not recognize any right of action based solely on an implied contract between parties who had never entered into a formal agreement regarding payment or benefit entitlements. This decision established precedent which has since been used in cases involving similar disputes over maritime contracts and obligations.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In The Star, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a ship called The Star had been legally captured by an American privateer during the War of 1812. A majority of justices held that it had not been lawfully taken and ordered restitution for its owners. However, Justice Story dissented from this opinion on two grounds: firstly, he argued that under international law at the time, any vessel found in enemy waters could be seized as a prize; secondly, he contended that even if there were some doubt about this point of law then the claimants should have provided more evidence to support their case before they could expect compensation. In conclusion, Justice Story believed that The Star's capture was lawful and no restitution should be paid out.

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