Ogden v. Parks

New York Supreme Court

Ogden v. Parks

16 Johns. 180

DecidedMay 15, 1819

StatusPublished

This text of 16 Johns. 180 (Ogden v. Parks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ogden v. Parks, 16 Johns. 180 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1819).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

That the jurors were not freeholders was undoubtedly a good ground of challenge, and the question is, how it was to be proved. The jurors themselves had no interest in the question, and were competent witnesses as to that fact. This sudden and unexpected occurrence at the trial cannot be guarded against, or be met in any other way ; and from the necessity of the case, this kind of evidence must he resorted to, or the objection, though well founded, can seldom avail. The Justice, therefore, erred, and the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

That the jurors were not freeholders was undoubtedly a good ground of challenge, and the question is, how it was to be proved. The jurors themselves had no interest in the question, and were competent witnesses as to that fact. This sudden and unexpected occurrence at the trial cannot be guarded against, or be met in any other way ; and from the necessity of the case, this kind of evidence must he resorted to, or the objection, though well founded, can seldom avail. The Justice, therefore, erred, and the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 Johns. 180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ogden-v-parks-nysupct-1819.