Reid v. Hoffman

53 Tenn. 440
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 21, 1871
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 53 Tenn. 440 (Reid v. Hoffman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reid v. Hoffman, 53 Tenn. 440 (Tenn. 1871).

Opinion

TurNey, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

In an application for writs of error corarn nobis, and for writs of supersedeas, an affidavit to the petition, made by one styling himself agent for the petitioners, is insufficient and is no affidavit, unless it appear in the affidavit or petition that the facts relied on are peculiarly within the knowledge of such agent, or good cause shown for the employment of an agent.

Under a different rule, it is difficult to imagine a case in which the writs might not • be maintained, as all the party desiring the writs would have to do, would be to employ an agent, make a statement to to him of assumed facts, necessary for his purposes, have the agent see his attorney, inform him of these facts, have prepared a petition embracing such facts, and, as in this case, swear to them “to the best of his information and belief,” thus enabling dissatisfied suitors by artful dodges to cheat the law.

Affirm the judgment.

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

Related

Thomas Edward Kotewa v. State of Tennessee
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, 2011
Alexander v. State
123 P. 68 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 Tenn. 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reid-v-hoffman-tenn-1871.