Wynne v. Aubuchon

23 Mo. 30
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided March 15, 1856·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Scott, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

There was no error in refusing the instruction asked, by the defendant, as it assumed the identity of the mare claimed by the plaintiff with that alleged to belong to - the defendant. Whether the mare claimed by the plaintiff was the same alleged [32]*32to belong to the defendant was the very matter in dispute, and the court properly refused an instruction which assumed such to be the fact.

Matters of record can not be proved by parol. If there was any legal process or proceedings by which the mare was taken from the plaintiff and put into the possession of the defendant, a copy of such proceedings should have been produced. The declaration of a witness that there were such proceedings, was no such evidence as would have warranted an instruction or supported a claim founded on them.

The other judges concurring, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Wynne v. Aubuchon, 23 Mo. 30 (Mo. 1856).

23 Mo. 30 (Wynne v. Aubuchon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. . Snipes
76 S.E. 243 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1912)
State ex rel. George v. Swift
10 Nev. 176 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1875)