Leatherberry v. Radcliffe

15 F. Cas. 115, 5 D.C. 550, 5 Cranch 550
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia·Decided March 15, 1839·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

But the Court overruled the objections, and permitted the deposition to be read, being of opinion that it was sufficient for'the plaintiff to show, at the time of trial, that the witness was gone” “ to a greater distance than one hundred miles from the place of trial; ” and that the return of a subpoena, non est, is only one means of making that fact appear to the satisfaction of the Court, but not the only means.

Note. The Court being bound by law to hold a session in Alexandria on the 6th of May, adjourned on Saturday, the 4th, to Monday, the 20th of May, and in the mean time sat nine days in Alexandria.

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

Leatherberry v. Radcliffe, 15 F. Cas. 115, 5 D.C. 550, 5 Cranch 550 (circtddc 1839).

15 F. Cas. 115 (Leatherberry v. Radcliffe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chicago City Railway Co. v. Schaefer
121 Ill. App. 334 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1905)
Whitford v. Clark County
13 F. 837 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri, 1882)