People v. Spooner
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
The defendant was indicted for uttering and publishing as' true, a forged mortgage, purporting to be made by Michael Tuke and Polly his wife, creating a charge on the real estate Of Tuke and his wife, with intent to defraud, &c.
Read the full summary
The defendant was indicted for uttering and publishing as' true, a forged mortgage, purporting to be made by Michael Tuke and Polly his wife, creating a charge on the real estate Of Tuke and his wife, with intent to defraud, &c. (2 R. S. 670, §§ 22, 39.) The defendant was tried at the Oneida oyer and terminer before Gridley, C. Judge, and two judges of the county courts, in September, 1844. After the district attorney had given evidence to prove the alleged offence, he called a witness who testified as follows: I l'eside in the city of Utica, and. have been clerk in chancery for ten or eleven…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Bronson, Ch. J.
The general rule' is, that a witness must have acquired a knowledge of the party’s handwriting, either by seeing him write, by corresponding with him,, or in some other way, before he is qualified to speak on the subject. An exception to the rule has sometimes been made, and persons supposed to be skilled in detecting forgeries, although not acquainted with the party’s hand-writing, have been allowed to give their opinion on the question whether a particular instrument or signature was written in a genuine or imitated character. In The King v. Cator, (4 Esp. 117,)…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Miles v. . LoomisNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Huston v. SchindlerIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Boyle v. ColmanNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Sackett v. SpencerNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Johnson v. HicksNew York Supreme Court · 1869
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.