Andrews v. Vanduzer

New York Supreme Court

Andrews v. Vanduzer

11 Johns. 38

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 15, 1814

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 11 Johns. 38 (Andrews v. Vanduzer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Andrews v. Vanduzer, 11 Johns. 38 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1814).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The decision of the court below was correct. The cases in Cro. Jac. 677. 1 Ld. Raym. 727. Bull. N. P. 9. show that the defendant who would justify a charge of felony, must justify as to the specific charge laid, and cannot set up a charge of the same thing, but distinct as to the subject matter. It is a settled rule that a defendant cannot give in evidence, under the general issue in an action of slander, matter which might be pleaded in bar, nor can he give in evidence any other crime than the one charged. The judgment below must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The decision of the court below was correct. The cases in Cro. Jac. 677. 1 Ld. Raym. 727. Bull. N. P. 9. show that the defendant who would justify a charge of felony, must justify as to the specific charge laid, and cannot set up a charge of the same thing, but distinct as to the subject matter. It is a settled rule that a defendant cannot give in evidence, under the general issue in an action of slander, matter which might be pleaded in bar, nor can he give in evidence any other crime than the one charged. The judgment below must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Johns. 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andrews-v-vanduzer-nysupct-1814.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack