Bassett v. Marshall

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Bassett v. Marshall

9 Mass. 312

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1812

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 9 Mass. 312 (Bassett v. Marshall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bassett v. Marshall, 9 Mass. 312 (Mass. 1812).

Pincite

Opinion

But the Court

were of opinion that, since it was proved that the magistrate made no record of his administering the oath, the evidence admitted was the 1 ¿st that could be required. The testimony [282]*282of the witnesses was therefore legally admitted, and was competent to prove the fact.

Sproat and Holmes for the defendant in error.

The judgment was affirmed, with costs for the defendant in error.

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

But the Court

were of opinion that, since it was proved that the magistrate made no record of his administering the oath, the evidence admitted was the 1 ¿st that could be required. The testimony [282]*282of the witnesses was therefore legally admitted, and was competent to prove the fact.

Sproat and Holmes for the defendant in error.

The judgment was affirmed, with costs for the defendant in error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Mass. 312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bassett-v-marshall-mass-1812.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack