Wadsworth v. Thompson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Wadsworth v. Thompson

18 Ga. 709

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedAugust 15, 1855

DocketNo. 102

StatusPublished

This text of 18 Ga. 709 (Wadsworth v. Thompson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wadsworth v. Thompson, 18 Ga. 709 (Ga. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Benning, J.

delivering the opinion.

Even if the fi. fa., and, affidavit! of illegality, in cases of this sort,, are to-- be considered .'as-.belonging to evidence, rather than to pleading, we.think that they should, in this case, have been.admitted to. the-Jury bythe.Cdurt, at the time when the Court'was asked to adihit.them to the Jury. That the Court had'the power to. admit, them -.to the Jury at that time, there can be no doubt.’. And!the.--.case-mas?'one in which, as it appears to us, the power should have been- exercised.

The defendant did. not put his. objection to the admission of the papers, on . the'ground that, he would be surprised by them if admitted.'. And: the mature of,'them is such, that if they hadheen,-, admitted,': it isprobable.'that: they would not have drawn a singlé..comment.from his Counsel. They could serve toi.es.tablish:,only, thcifformal part'of the-plaintiff’s case.

Now. if.thc;power.tOi.adrhit evidence '.is not to be exercised in. such a case as-this, what kind of á case is it in which the power is to bo exercised? See Taylor & Taylor vs. Smith, (16 Ga. R. 11.)

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

By the Court.

Benning, J.

delivering the opinion.

Even if the fi. fa., and, affidavit! of illegality, in cases of this sort,, are to-- be considered .'as-.belonging to evidence, rather than to pleading, we.think that they should, in this case, have been.admitted to. the-Jury bythe.Cdurt, at the time when the Court'was asked to adihit.them to the Jury. That the Court had'the power to. admit, them -.to the Jury at that time, there can be no doubt.’. And!the.--.case-mas?'one in which, as it appears to us, the power should have been- exercised.

The defendant did. not put his. objection to the admission of the papers, on . the'ground that, he would be surprised by them if admitted.'. And: the mature of,'them is such, that if they hadheen,-, admitted,': it isprobable.'that: they would not have drawn a singlé..comment.from his Counsel. They could serve toi.es.tablish:,only, thcifformal part'of the-plaintiff’s case.

Now. if.thc;power.tOi.adrhit evidence '.is not to be exercised in. such a case as-this, what kind of á case is it in which the power is to bo exercised? See Taylor & Taylor vs. Smith, (16 Ga. R. 11.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 Ga. 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wadsworth-v-thompson-ga-1855.