Cary v. Campbell

New York Supreme Court

Cary v. Campbell

10 Johns. 363

DecidedAugust 15, 1813

StatusPublished

This text of 10 Johns. 363 (Cary v. Campbell) 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

Cary v. Campbell, 10 Johns. 363 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1813).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The justice erred in admitting parol proof of the note, as a lost note, when there was no proof of its being lost. What the justice might have said as to the loss, was no legal evidence to the jury. It was requisite that proof on oath should have been given of the loss of the note, before the secondary evidence could be let in. Without examining the other points suggested, the evidence offered by the plaintiff was not sufficient to entitle him to recover, and the verdict was correct.

Judgment affirmed-

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

Per Curiam.

The justice erred in admitting parol proof of the note, as a lost note, when there was no proof of its being lost. What the justice might have said as to the loss, was no legal evidence to the jury. It was requisite that proof on oath should have been given of the loss of the note, before the secondary evidence could be let in. Without examining the other points suggested, the evidence offered by the plaintiff was not sufficient to entitle him to recover, and the verdict was correct.

Judgment affirmed-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Johns. 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cary-v-campbell-nysupct-1813.