Smith v. Hazel

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

Smith v. Hazel

22 F. Cas. 560, 3 D.C. 55, 3 Cranch 55

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1826

StatusPublished

This text of 22 F. Cas. 560 (Smith v. Hazel) 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

Smith v. Hazel, 22 F. Cas. 560, 3 D.C. 55, 3 Cranch 55 (circtddc 1826).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court, at first, thought that the evidence was not admissible, because it was matter of defence to the original suit, of which the plaintiff in that suit might have availed himself, but did not, and that the defendant could not give evidence that the plaintiff in this suit ought not to have had judgment in the replevin; but, upon reconsideration, permitted the defendant to give the evidence, reserving a right to the plaintiff to move for a new trial, on the ground of admitting improper evidence.

Verdict for the plaintiff, $200 damages.

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

The Court, at first, thought that the evidence was not admissible, because it was matter of defence to the original suit, of which the plaintiff in that suit might have availed himself, but did not, and that the defendant could not give evidence that the plaintiff in this suit ought not to have had judgment in the replevin; but, upon reconsideration, permitted the defendant to give the evidence, reserving a right to the plaintiff to move for a new trial, on the ground of admitting improper evidence.

Verdict for the plaintiff, $200 damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 F. Cas. 560, 3 D.C. 55, 3 Cranch 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-hazel-circtddc-1826.