M'Carty v. Sherman

New York Supreme Court

M'Carty v. Sherman

3 Johns. 429

New York Supreme Court·Decided August 15, 1808·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The objection to the certificate of the former justice, as evidence, was well founded. It ought to have been proved by the justice himself, who gave the judgment, or a sworn copy of his minutes should have been produced. In the case of Kellogg v. Mauney, the evidence of the certificate was not objected to, and was, therefore, considered as admitted. The judgment below must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

The objection to the certificate of the former justice, as evidence, was well founded. It ought to have been proved by the justice himself, who gave the judgment, or a sworn copy of his minutes should have been produced. In the case of Kellogg v. Mauney, the evidence of the certificate was not objected to, and was, therefore, considered as admitted. The judgment below must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

M'Carty v. Sherman, 3 Johns. 429 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1808).

Pincite

3 Johns. 429 (M'Carty v. Sherman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related