King v. Tarlton

2 Md. 473

General Court of Virginia·Decided May 15, 1790·Published

Opinion

The Court

were of opinion that the said Cecil was a com» ietent witness, and directed him to he sworn.

The plaintiff excepted to this opinion.

Yerdipt and judgment thereon for the defendants.

Thomas and Key, for the appellant. Stone and Merrick, for the appellees.

The plaintiff appealed to the General Court, which Court affirmed the judgment of the County Court.

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

King v. Tarlton, 2 Md. 473 (Va. Super. Ct. 1790).

Pincite

2 Md. 473 (King v. Tarlton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.