Mason v. Lawrason

16 F. Cas. 1046, 1 Cranch 190
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
DecidedNovember 15, 1804
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 16 F. Cas. 1046 (Mason v. Lawrason) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mason v. Lawrason, 16 F. Cas. 1046, 1 Cranch 190 (circtddc 1804).

Opinion

THE COURT

decided that they were not bound to give oyer, because there was no pro-fert; because oyer is not demandable after the first term; and because the plaintiffs did not sue in the right of their intestate, but in their own right. So that the letters of administration constituted no part of their title.

A certificate of discharge of McPherson, as [1047]*1047a bankrupt, was offered in evidence, with a seal, said by counsel to be the seal of the United States district court in Richmond, but not stated by the clerk to be such, but barely signed by him.

[See 3 Cranch (7 U.. S.) 492.] (CRANCH, Circuit Judge, absent,)

permitted verbal evidence to be given that this was the seal, and also that the clerk of that court, W. Marshall, had usually attested records in that manner, and did not insist on its being authenticated agreeably to the requisites of the act of congress, as it was not the act of a state court, but one of the United States. (Judge Fitzhugh’s Notes.)

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

Related

Soo Hoo Yee v. United States
3 F.2d 592 (Second Circuit, 1924)
Turnbull v. Payson
95 U.S. 418 (Supreme Court, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 F. Cas. 1046, 1 Cranch 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mason-v-lawrason-circtddc-1804.