Tibbs v. Parrott
This text of 23 F. Cas. 1197 (Tibbs v. Parrott) 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.
Opinion
stopped Mr. Mason in reply, and said the law is too plain to require further argument. The plaintiffs must satisfy the jury that the contract was made between the plaintiffs and defendant. The deposition having only stated that the goods were sold by William P. Tibbs & Company, the jury must be satisfied by evidence that the house of William P. Tibbs & Company, consists of the plaintiffs, William P. Tibbs and Thomas Blanc. The plaintiffs took a bill of exceptions.
Verdict for defendant. New trial granted, on the ground of surprise, that the court should require such evidence. See the case of Woodward v. Sutton [Case No. 18,009], at Alexandria, November term, 1806.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 F. Cas. 1197, 1 Cranch 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tibbs-v-parrott-circtddc-1806.