Legal Opinion

Ruggles v. Hall

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1817PublishedCited by 2 opinions

THIS was an application, on the part of the defendant, t© set aside a verdict taken for the plaintiff, at the Ontario circuit} . * ' m July, 1816, and for a new trial, on affidavits submitted tov the. court, without argument, from which it appeared, that the action was brought upon a promissory note, held .by the plaintiff, executed by the defendant, payable to Thaddeus Oakes, or bearer, which was delivered to Samuel Hildreth, for the purpose of being negotiated in…

Read the full summary

THIS was an application, on the part of the defendant, t© set aside a verdict taken for the plaintiff, at the Ontario circuit} . * ' m July, 1816, and for a new trial, on affidavits submitted tov the. court, without argument, from which it appeared, that the action was brought upon a promissory note, held .by the plaintiff, executed by the defendant, payable to Thaddeus Oakes, or bearer, which was delivered to Samuel Hildreth, for the purpose of being negotiated in New-Yorlc, to enable one Samuel Allen to purchase merchandise : goods were, accordingly, purchased of Smith 8- Waters, merchants,…

1Per curiam

This is a motion to set aside a verdict obtained at the last Ontario circuit, on the ground that Samuel Hildreth, a witness subpoenaed, and who had been attending ;on the part of the defendant, unexpectedly absented himself about the time the cause was called on to trial," his absence not being known until after the jury was called. The affidavit of the witness accompanies this application, and shows very clearly the materiality of his testimony. There are some affidavits which state declarations of his, somewhat at variance with this affidavit. It is to be observed, however, that these were…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jenks v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Loree v. ReevesMichigan Supreme Court · 1851

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API