Georgetown Turnpike-Road Co. v. Custis
This text of 1 D.C. 585 (Georgetown Turnpike-Road Co. v. Custis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
were of opinion that they had jurisdiction to prevent the recording, and to quash the proceedings if irregular or illegal.
Mr. F. S. Key then objected to the inquisition that it was not under the seals of the jurors.
Mr. E. J. Lee, contra, was stopped by the Court, upon that point. But it appearing in evidence that some of the jurors were interested, and others did not stand indifferent,'-—
The Court (nem. con.) refused to suffer the inquisition and proceedings to be recorded, and ordered them to be quashed.1
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 D.C. 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/georgetown-turnpike-road-co-v-custis-dcd-1809.