Jones v. . Zollicoffer

9 N.C. 492
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 5, 1823
StatusPublished

This text of 9 N.C. 492 (Jones v. . Zollicoffer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jones v. . Zollicoffer, 9 N.C. 492 (N.C. 1823).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was pronounced by

Henderson, Judge.

The evidence (the copy of a copy) was very clearly inadmissible ; but since the motion has been made for a, new trial, the original will, properly authenticated, has been produced, by which it appears that the copy was correct. The Legislature having made an olfice copy of a will, and a fortiori, the original itself properly authenticated, conclusive evidence whore fraud has not been suggested, and none in due time has been suggested here, in fact, none at all at any time, we are thereby assured, beyond a judicial doubt, that the J ory was not misled by ‘the evidence which was offered to them on that point. Were the evidence by which the former evidence was shewn, in point of fact correct, not conclusive upen the parties, a new trial should he granted, because we ought not to preclude them from litigating before the Jury the truth of that, evidence j but here if is a vain and useless thing, the evidence now offered being conclusive, that the Jury was not misled.

The rule for a new trial of the issue must therefore be discharged.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 N.C. 492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-zollicoffer-nc-1823.