Gervais v. Baird

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Gervais v. Baird

4 S.C.L. 37

DecidedApril 15, 1806

StatusPublished

This text of 4 S.C.L. 37 (Gervais v. Baird) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gervais v. Baird, 4 S.C.L. 37 (S.C. 1806).

Pincite

Opinion

G'kimke, J.,

delivered the unanimous opinion of the court, that by the act of 1802, to prevent'the unnecessary attendance of witnesses, proving the signature of a note is sufficient, without proving it by the subscribing witness, (vide 1 vol. 387,) and although the signature be the mark only of the party, and not the name written, yet, if it is proved to be the signature of the party, it shall be sufficient. But without this proof, the evidence would be insufficient. Proving the handwriting of the subscribing witness would not be sufficient.

New trial refused.

Present, Geimke, Waties, Bay, Teezevant, Beevaed, and Wilds, Justices.

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

G'kimke, J.,

delivered the unanimous opinion of the court, that by the act of 1802, to prevent'the unnecessary attendance of witnesses, proving the signature of a note is sufficient, without proving it by the subscribing witness, (vide 1 vol. 387,) and although the signature be the mark only of the party, and not the name written, yet, if it is proved to be the signature of the party, it shall be sufficient. But without this proof, the evidence would be insufficient. Proving the handwriting of the subscribing witness would not be sufficient.

New trial refused.

Present, Geimke, Waties, Bay, Teezevant, Beevaed, and Wilds, Justices.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 S.C.L. 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gervais-v-baird-sc-1806.