Eakin v. Raub
Significance, Marshall V. Gibson: Head To Head, Further Readings
Plaintiffs
James Eakin, et al.
Defendants
Daniel Raub, et al.
Plaintiffs' Claim
That a state statute imposing a new period of limitations in which to bring a claim, as applied to bar plaintiff's claim, violated the state constitution, and that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had the power to declare the statute void.
Chief Lawyer for Plaintiffs
B. Tilghman
Chief Defense Lawyer
Joseph Hemphill
Justices for the Court
Tilghman, Duncan
Justices Dissenting
John B. Gibson
Place
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Date of Decision
16 April 1825
Decision
That the state supreme court has the power to review legislative acts and, if contrary to the state constitution, declare such acts void.
Related Cases
- Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
Additional topics
- Fletcher v. Peck - Significance, Land Grabs And Corrupt Legislators, Innocent Third Parties, Contracts And The Constitution, Ex Post Facto Law
- Dorothy Talbye Trial: 1638
- Eakin v. Raub - Further Readings
- Eakin v. Raub - Significance
- Eakin v. Raub - Marshall V. Gibson: Head To Head
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1637 to 1832