Thurston v. Murray
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
THIS cause was tried at a Nisi Prius in November last, before Mr. Justice Brackenridge. A paper -which is not evidence per se in a suit between the underwriter and the assured, does not become so for any purpose, in consequence of liav- . ing been exhibited by tile latter to the former as one of the preliminary proofs of loss; except the question be merely whether such a paper wits exhibited.
Read the full summary
THIS cause was tried at a Nisi Prius in November last, before Mr. Justice Brackenridge. A paper -which is not evidence per se in a suit between the underwriter and the assured, does not become so for any purpose, in consequence of liav- . ing been exhibited by tile latter to the former as one of the preliminary proofs of loss; except the question be merely whether such a paper wits exhibited. It was an action on a policy of insurance on three fourths of the freight of the ship Mary, at and from Amsterdam to Surinam and back. The ship sailed from Amsterdam on the '26th of April 1796, and three…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
On the trial of this cause at Nisi Prius, Judge Brackenridge reserved a point of law, for the consideration of this court. The agent of the plaintiffs, when he demanded payment of the loss, lodged with the bioker through whom the insurance was effected, sundry documents to prove the loss, and among others, a writing purporting to be a copy of a decree of the English court of appeals in admiralty cases, not certified under the seal of the court. The defendant’s counsel objected to the reading of this paper to the jury; but it was permitted to be read, not as evidence of *328the truth…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Travelers Insurance v. SheppardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- Citizens' Fire Insurance, Security & Land Co. v. DollCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1872
- Andrews v. HerriotNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Commonwealth Insurance v. SennettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1862