New Ingestion is live for the UK, the EU, US federal law and ~7M US decisions. Search the corpus ›

Miller v. The Ship Resolution

2 U.S. 19

How do we know? Taken from the published judgment; not rewritten by the platform.

This is a decision of United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, given 1 December 1781, from Caselaw Access Project. No later decision here cites it — that does not show it is still good law.

No later authority in this platform cites this decision. That means the platform holds no subsequent treatment — not that the decision is undisturbed.

Source

Published by
Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab
Source
Caselaw Access Project
Licence
Open — US judicial opinions are not copyrightable (government edicts doctrine)
Held here since
26 September 2026

Version

Decided
1 December 1781
Later treatment
Not cited by any later authority here
Jurisdiction
United States — Federal

Authority

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Citation
2 U.S. 19

OCR confidence 0.64 is below 0.7. This text was read from a scan and contains transcription errors. It may be relied on for what the case decided, but must not be presented as a verbatim quotation.

first-named party

Miller

second-named party

The Ship Resolution

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Citation
2 U.S. 19
Decided
1781-12-01
Jurisdiction
United States — Federal
Case type
Not available
Jury
Unknown
Current status
No later treatment is recorded in this platform. That is not proof the decision was not appealed.

Outcome

Outcome not clearly established in available sources.

Stated Derived AI-structured Not available AI-generated organisation; verify against the original judgment.

Shown: what the publisher states and what the citation graph shows. Claims, evidence, witnesses and reasoning are extracted only on request, by an AI model, and each item is checked against the paragraph it cites.

Sign in to structure this case.

Case at a glance

  • 0 Issues
  • 0 Claims & positions
  • 0 Evidence items
  • 0 Witnesses
  • 0 Authorities
  • 2 Judgment paragraphs
  • 0 Later citations

Counts describe what was recorded; they say nothing about how strong a side's case was.

Legal issues

No issues recorded.

Decision

Outcome not clearly established in available sources.

Remedies

No remedy extracted.

Why the court reached this result

Not available — structure the case to extract the court's chain of reasons.

Timeline

  1. Decided

    publisher's record

Sources

  1. Official text: 2 U.S. 19 ↗ — the judgment on this platform
  2. Citation graph: 0 authorities cited, 0 later citations.

Method

Items marked 🟢 were stated by the publisher or extracted with a quotation the platform found word for word in the cited paragraph. 🔵 comes from the citation graph. 🟡 was extracted by an AI model with a paragraph reference whose wording could not be confirmed — read the paragraph. Allegations, responses, findings and orders are kept apart and never merged into "what happened".

AI summary

Choose who the summary is for. Every statement links to the paragraph it comes from — the summary is never the only way to read this.

Ask LawTAG

Sign in to ask your team's LawTAGs about this page.

In the news

News coverage of “Miller v. The Ship Resolution” in the last three months, from GDELT.