Johnson v. Clark

1 Tyl. 449
CourtSupreme Court of Vermont
DecidedJuly 15, 1802
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Tyl. 449 (Johnson v. Clark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnson v. Clark, 1 Tyl. 449 (Vt. 1802).

Opinion

Sed per Curiam.

The deposition cannot be read. -The objections are, that it is in the hand-writing of the party’s attorney,, and taken by a Justice of the Peace, interested in the cause. The authorities cited embrace cases where depositions were taken legally, though-not in the causes pending. By the decease of the deponents they obtained efficacy under the ge[450]*450neral principle of constituting the best evidence which could be produced. But here the deposition is illegally taken. The decease of the deponent cannot render that valid which was intrinsically void. It would be setting aside the Chancery process of taking depositions in perpetuara rei memoriam, to sanction the admission of depositions taken otherwise than agreeably to the statute.

Daniel Chipman and Samuel Walker, for the plaintiff. John Cook, Cephas Smith, and — -- — -, for the defendant.

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

Related

Burton v. Driggs
87 U.S. 125 (Supreme Court, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Tyl. 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-clark-vt-1802.