Snowden v. Hemming

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas

Snowden v. Hemming

1 U.S. 83, 1 Dall. 83

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County

DecidedJune 15, 1784

StatusPublished

This text of 1 U.S. 83 (Snowden v. Hemming) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Snowden v. Hemming, 1 U.S. 83, 1 Dall. 83 (1784).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court:

—It would occasion infinite trouble and confusion were the defendant’s doctrine to be admitted, and it is impossible to say where the mischief would end. It is true, that before a jury, proof may be made of the consideration, and of the time of delivering a bond; but this act of Assembly which, in particular cases, grants a delay of execution to the defendant, upon the tender of the interest and costs, must, surely, at the same time, recognize the written instruments as conclusive evidence of the contract; and we can enquire no farther.

Wilcocks took nothing by his motion.

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

By the Court:

—It would occasion infinite trouble and confusion were the defendant’s doctrine to be admitted, and it is impossible to say where the mischief would end. It is true, that before a jury, proof may be made of the consideration, and of the time of delivering a bond; but this act of Assembly which, in particular cases, grants a delay of execution to the defendant, upon the tender of the interest and costs, must, surely, at the same time, recognize the written instruments as conclusive evidence of the contract; and we can enquire no farther.

Wilcocks took nothing by his motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 U.S. 83, 1 Dall. 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snowden-v-hemming-pactcomplphilad-1784.