Codman v. Caldwell

31 Me. 560
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1850
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 31 Me. 560 (Codman v. Caldwell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Codman v. Caldwell, 31 Me. 560 (Me. 1850).

Opinion

Wells, J., orally.

One objection to the plaintiffs’ book and oath is that, from the nature of the case, there must be better evidence.

The book and oath of a party are often received to prove sales or services, known to other persons and proveable by them. A plaintiff may in that mode prove a sale, though his clerk knew of it, and could testify to it. So of physicians.

The cases of bulky and heavy articles, and of articles delivered to third persons, stand on a different reason. The demands of attorneys are sustainable by any mode of proof, applicable to other descriptions of persons. The objection cannot prevail.

It is further contended, that it was not competent for plaintiffs, by their book and oath, to prove that they were employed by the defendant. Rut a plaintiff may testify to the delivery of goods. There is much resemblance in the cases. This objection, too, is unavailing. Exceptions overruled.

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

Related

Davis v. McClelland
170 S.W. 691 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Rexford v. Comstock
3 N.Y.S. 876 (New York Supreme Court, 1888)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 Me. 560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/codman-v-caldwell-me-1850.