White & Hall v. Hawn

5 Johns. 351
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 1810
StatusPublished

This text of 5 Johns. 351 (White & Hall v. Hawn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
White & Hall v. Hawn, 5 Johns. 351 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1810).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The mode of proving the former trial and judgment was incompetent; and being objected to, ought not to have been permitted. In the case of Lawrence v. Houghton, (5 Johns. Rep. 129.) no objection was made to such proof, at the trial. The judgment below must be reversed,

Judgment reversed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Johns. 351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-hall-v-hawn-nysupct-1810.