Dunlop v. Peter

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Dunlop v. Peter

8 F. Cas. 91, 1 Cranch 403

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia·Decided June 15, 1807·No. Case No. 4,168·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The substance of the affirmative of the issue is with the plaintiffs, the original libellants. They are the party who wish to alter the existing state of things. The defendants can offer no evidence until the sanity of the testator is impeached. The defendants have nothing to do. The plaintiff is the mover, the actor, and on him the [92]*92“burden of proof lies. It is his business therefore to open and close the argument

DUCKETT, Circuit Judge, absent

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

PER CURIAM.

The substance of the affirmative of the issue is with the plaintiffs, the original libellants. They are the party who wish to alter the existing state of things. The defendants can offer no evidence until the sanity of the testator is impeached. The defendants have nothing to do. The plaintiff is the mover, the actor, and on him the [92]*92“burden of proof lies. It is his business therefore to open and close the argument

DUCKETT, Circuit Judge, absent

Dunlop v. Peter, 8 F. Cas. 91, 1 Cranch 403 (circtddc 1807).

Pincite

8 F. Cas. 91 (Dunlop v. Peter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related