Slacum v. Simms

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Slacum v. Simms

22 F. Cas. 316, 1 Cranch 242

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedJune 15, 1805

StatusPublished

This text of 22 F. Cas. 316 (Slacum v. Simms) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Slacum v. Simms, 22 F. Cas. 316, 1 Cranch 242 (circtddc 1805).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT

was of opinion

(PITZHUGH, Circuit Judge, absent)

that the warrant of discharge is not conclusive evidence that Simms was discharged in due course of law.

Mr. Jones, for defendants, then prayed an instruction to the jury, that if they should be of opinion, from the evidence, that the warrant of discharge was obtained by the fraud of Simms alone, without the participation of the magistrates, or of the defendant, Wise, (the surety,) the warrant was not void so as to enable the plaintiff to recover against the defendant, Wise, in this action. Which instruction THE COURT refused to give; but instructed them that such fraud, if proved, would render the warrant void, and therefore the issue could not be supported on the part of the defendants.

Bill of exceptions taken. Verdict for plaintiff, $1600.

Reversed by the supreme court, 3 Cranch [7 U. S.] 300.

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

THE COURT

was of opinion

(PITZHUGH, Circuit Judge, absent)

that the warrant of discharge is not conclusive evidence that Simms was discharged in due course of law.

Mr. Jones, for defendants, then prayed an instruction to the jury, that if they should be of opinion, from the evidence, that the warrant of discharge was obtained by the fraud of Simms alone, without the participation of the magistrates, or of the defendant, Wise, (the surety,) the warrant was not void so as to enable the plaintiff to recover against the defendant, Wise, in this action. Which instruction THE COURT refused to give; but instructed them that such fraud, if proved, would render the warrant void, and therefore the issue could not be supported on the part of the defendants.

Bill of exceptions taken. Verdict for plaintiff, $1600.

Reversed by the supreme court, 3 Cranch [7 U. S.] 300.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 F. Cas. 316, 1 Cranch 242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slacum-v-simms-circtddc-1805.