Scott v. Kenforth

Ohio Supreme Court

Scott v. Kenforth

1 Wright 55, 1 Ohio Ch. 55

DecidedApril 15, 1832

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 55 (Scott v. Kenforth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Scott v. Kenforth, 1 Wright 55, 1 Ohio Ch. 55 (Ohio 1832).

Pincite

Opinion

*BY THE COURT.

The rule is well settled, that you must [56 substantially prove the words as laid in the declaration, and that they were spoken in the manner and sense charged; otherwise the proof does not sustain the declaration. The proof here does not satisfy either requisition. It is, that Scott told the defendant to put in the tobacco, and he did not. This will not support the allegation in the declaration. We are of opinion that neither set of words are proven.

A juror was withdrawn by consent and leave given to amend.

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

*BY THE COURT.

The rule is well settled, that you must [56 substantially prove the words as laid in the declaration, and that they were spoken in the manner and sense charged; otherwise the proof does not sustain the declaration. The proof here does not satisfy either requisition. It is, that Scott told the defendant to put in the tobacco, and he did not. This will not support the allegation in the declaration. We are of opinion that neither set of words are proven.

A juror was withdrawn by consent and leave given to amend.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 55, 1 Ohio Ch. 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-kenforth-ohio-1832.