Legal Opinion
Van Doren v. Walker
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 15, 1805PublishedCited by 1 opinion
In Error on certiorari. The return does not state that any constable was sworn to attend the jury, though it is evident they retired. As no improper practice is alleged, *and it does not appear a constable was not sworn, the court will intend it was done.
1Per curiam
As nothing is said about a constable’s being sworn, or having charge of the jury, the court cannot supply it by intendment. There are no words in the return to intend by. We might as well intend an issue joined, or a venire when nothing is stated. The justice must state, as the writ requires him, all -his proceedings, the whole history of the suit. When a proceeding so essential is omitted, we cannot consider it as done.
Judgment reversed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fink v. HallNew York Supreme Court · 1811