On the return of the record (to which were annexed several depositions and papers produced in the court below, as well as the papers referred to in the bill of exceptions) the following errors were assigned, the defendant in error pleaded in nullo est erratum, and issue was thereupon joined: #That judgment had been given for the plaintiff, instead of the defendant below, on the 3rd Count. #That the circuit court, proceeding as a court of common law, in an action on the case, for money had and received, etc., had no jurisdiction of the cause; the question, as it appears on the record, being a question of prize, or no prize, or wholly dependent thereon, and, as such, it was, exclusively of admiralty jurisdiction. #That the evidence referred to in the bill of exceptions ought not to have been rejected on the trial of the cause. The judges, after some advisement, delivered their opinionsseriatim In law, ''seriatim'' (Latin for "in series") indicates that a court is addressing multiple issues in a certain order, such as the order in which the issues were originally presented to the court. Legal usage A seriatim opinion is an opinion del ....''Bingham v. Cabot'', .
See also
* ''Bingham v. Cabot'' (1798)References
External links
* {{caselaw source , case = ''Bingham v. Cabot'', {{Ussc, 3, 19, 1795, Dall., 3, el=no , justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/3/19/ , loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep003/usrep003019/usrep003019.pdf United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Rutledge Court 1795 in United States case law