Fletcher v. Peck
Significance, Land Grabs And Corrupt Legislators, Innocent Third Parties, Contracts And The Constitution, Ex Post Facto Law
Peck had purchased some land from the state of Georgia, which he later sold to Fletcher. Subsequently, the Georgia state legislature rescinded the original sale to Peck. Fletcher's claim was that he had bought the land in good faith and that Peck was guilty of breach of contract.
Chief Lawyers for Appellant
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
John Quincy Adams, Robert Goodloe Harper, Joseph Story
Justices for the Court
Samuel Chase, William Cushing, William Johnson, Henry Brockholst Livingston, John Marshall (writing for the Court), Thomas Todd, Bushrod Washington
Date of Decision
16 March 1810
That a legislature could repeal or modify the acts of a preceding legislature, but it could not invalidate a previously made contract.
- Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 519 (1819).
- Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheat. 122 (1819).
- Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Pet. 420 (1837).
- Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331 (1856).
Baltimore Law Review, Vol. 21, 1992.
Knappman, Edward W., ed. Great American Trials. Detroit, MI: Visible Ink Press, 1994.
- Foster v. Neilson - Significance
- Eakin v. Raub - Significance, Marshall V. Gibson: Head To Head, Further Readings
- Fletcher v. Peck - Significance
- Fletcher v. Peck - Further Readings
- Fletcher v. Peck - Land Grabs And Corrupt Legislators
- Fletcher v. Peck - Innocent Third Parties
- Fletcher v. Peck - Contracts And The Constitution
- Fletcher v. Peck - Ex Post Facto Law
- Fletcher v. Peck - Marvin Mandel Trial
- Other Free Encyclopedias