Petit ex rel. Hoffman v. M'Adam
This text of 2 Serg. & Rawle 420 (Petit ex rel. Hoffman v. M'Adam) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Upon the face of the bond it appears to have been sealed and delivered in the presence of Enoch Smith, who was living and not subpoenaed as a witness. It is not a record as supposed by the counsel for the plaintiff in error. It is not certified by the clerk of the Court of Quarter-Sessions to have been acknowledged in Court: and there[421]*421fore we must presume, that it was executed out of Court. It therefore should have been proved in the usual manner by the subscribing witness. We are of opinion, that the evidence was properly rejected, and therefore the judgment should be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Serg. & Rawle 420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petit-ex-rel-hoffman-v-madam-pa-1816.