Blackman v. Dowling

Supreme Court of Alabama

Blackman v. Dowling

57 Ala. 78

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 15, 1876

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 57 Ala. 78 (Blackman v. Dowling) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blackman v. Dowling, 57 Ala. 78 (Ala. 1876).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKELL, C. J.

The statute (R. C. § 2694) is cumulative, authorizing the admission iu evidence of public documents on the certificate of the head of a bureau or department of the general government. It does not exclude examined copies, verified by the evidence of a competent witness, admissible under the rules of common law. — 1 Green. § 91. There was no error in overruling the objections taken to the evidence of the witness Martin.

But in allowing parol evidence of the garnishment against the appellee, as the debtor of appellant, and the judgment before the justice of the peace, the circuit court erred. The proceedings before the justice were necessarily in writing, though not technically records, and must have been produced or proved by sworn copies.—Ware v. Robeson, 18 Ala. 105; Jones v. Davis, 2 Ala. 730; Kennedy v. Dear, 6 Port. 90. Eor this error the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

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

BRICKELL, C. J.

The statute (R. C. § 2694) is cumulative, authorizing the admission iu evidence of public documents on the certificate of the head of a bureau or department of the general government. It does not exclude examined copies, verified by the evidence of a competent witness, admissible under the rules of common law. — 1 Green. § 91. There was no error in overruling the objections taken to the evidence of the witness Martin.

But in allowing parol evidence of the garnishment against the appellee, as the debtor of appellant, and the judgment before the justice of the peace, the circuit court erred. The proceedings before the justice were necessarily in writing, though not technically records, and must have been produced or proved by sworn copies.—Ware v. Robeson, 18 Ala. 105; Jones v. Davis, 2 Ala. 730; Kennedy v. Dear, 6 Port. 90. Eor this error the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 Ala. 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blackman-v-dowling-ala-1876.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack