less than 1 minute read

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

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1637 to 1832