Storm v. United States,
94 U.S. 76 (1876)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Storm v. United States, 94 U.S. 76 (1876)

Storm v. United States

94 U.S. 76


1. Alleged errors not presented by a bill of exceptions nor otherwise apparent on the face of the record are not the proper subjects of reexamination by an appellate tribunal.

2. Defendants who have actually received the consideration of a written agreement cannot, in an action brought against them for a breach of their covenants, set up that the agreement did not bind the plaintiff to perform his covenants, provided it appears that he has performed them in good faith and without prejudice to the defendants.

3. Questions propounded to a witness, on his cross-examination, merely to ascertain the names of persons whom a party may desire to call as witnesses to disprove the case of the opposite party, may be excluded, and it is within the discretion of the presiding judge to determine, in view of the evidence previously introduced and of the nature of the testimony given by the witness in his examination-in-chief, to what extent a cross-examination, with a view to affect his credibility, shall be allowed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.