Mitchell v. Harmony
United States Supreme Court
54 U.S. 115, 13 How. 115, 14 L. Ed. 75 (1851)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
Mr. Harmony (plaintiff), a private United States citizen, set off on a trading expedition to New Mexico and parts of Mexico just before the start of the Mexican-American war. After war was declared, Harmony and other traders were allowed to follow the army and trade freely in places occupied by American forces. Harmony decided outside the Mexican city of Chihuahua that he no longer wanted to follow the expedition. At the suggestion of Colonel Mitchell (defendant), one of the commanders had Mitchell execute an order that Harmony was not allowed to leave. Harmony was then forced to continue on with the troops, taking his wagons, mules, and goods through dangerous conditions. Just before a battle on the way to Chihuahua, Harmony sought and was granted permission to leave, but later changed his mind because he feared his possessions would be at risk. Harmony’s mules and wagons were used in the battle, and his other goods had to be abandoned when they later evacuated the area. Mexican authorities later seized the remainder of Harmony’s property, and it was lost forever. Harmony brought an action against Mitchell in the circuit court for trespass for the detention and seizure of his property on the expedition. After a jury returned a verdict for Harmony, Mitchell appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Taney, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
