Brush v. Taggart
7 Johns. 19
Opinion
The decision below was correct. The ' contents of the writ of certiorari could not be proved by parol, so long as the writ itself, or a sworn copy of it, might have been produced. The case of Edmonstone v. Plaisted (4 Esp. Rep. 160.) shows the strict manner in which the contents of á process, or the existence of it, is to be proved,
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Brush v. Taggart, 7 Johns. 19 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1810).
7 Johns. 19 (Brush v. Taggart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Barth v. Loeffelholtz
84 N.W. 846 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1901)
Dawley v. Brown
16 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 461 (New York Supreme Court, 1876)
Day v. Moore
79 Mass. 522 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1859)