Ship v. Cuny

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Ship v. Cuny

7 Mart. 91

DecidedSeptember 15, 1820

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Mart. 91 (Ship v. Cuny) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ship v. Cuny, 7 Mart. 91 (La. 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

Martin, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. This appeal was made returnable to October term, but has, by consent, been argued at this. A statement of facts proven on the trial, by the witnesses, comes up with the record, certified by the district judge, without any mention of the time, at which the statement was made, or of the manner, in which it was obtained by the parties. It is clear from the terms, in which it is expressed, that it was under circumstances, which left the judge in doubt as to its fullness and correctness. In the commencement, he uses an expression, unusual in statement of facts, viz: as well as I can recollect, and he concludes by saying that there were many other facts proven, which he considered immaterial.

We are of opinion that this cannot be considered as a statement of facts, made in conformity with the provisions of the court law of 1813—and it [92]*92is clearly not a transcript of the testimony taken, as required by the act of 1817.

West'n District. September, 1820. Baldwin for the plaintiffs, Thomas for the defendants.

It is therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the district court be affirmed with costs.

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

Martin, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. This appeal was made returnable to October term, but has, by consent, been argued at this. A statement of facts proven on the trial, by the witnesses, comes up with the record, certified by the district judge, without any mention of the time, at which the statement was made, or of the manner, in which it was obtained by the parties. It is clear from the terms, in which it is expressed, that it was under circumstances, which left the judge in doubt as to its fullness and correctness. In the commencement, he uses an expression, unusual in statement of facts, viz: as well as I can recollect, and he concludes by saying that there were many other facts proven, which he considered immaterial.

We are of opinion that this cannot be considered as a statement of facts, made in conformity with the provisions of the court law of 1813—and it [92]*92is clearly not a transcript of the testimony taken, as required by the act of 1817.

West'n District. September, 1820. Baldwin for the plaintiffs, Thomas for the defendants.

It is therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the district court be affirmed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Mart. 91, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ship-v-cuny-la-1820.