Legal Opinion

Guyot v. Butts

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1830PublishedCited by 26 opinions

Motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. This action was tried at the Rensselaer circuit in November, 1828, when the plaintiffs obtained a verdict for $564,86 on a due bill for $300 made by the testator, payable to Mrs. Guyot, bearing date 17th September, 1816. The testator died in 1827. The defence attempted to be made out on the trial was payment; to prove which circumstantial evidence only was adduced, such as the poverty of the plaintiffs, their…

Read the full summary

Motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. This action was tried at the Rensselaer circuit in November, 1828, when the plaintiffs obtained a verdict for $564,86 on a due bill for $300 made by the testator, payable to Mrs. Guyot, bearing date 17th September, 1816. The testator died in 1827. The defence attempted to be made out on the trial was payment; to prove which circumstantial evidence only was adduced, such as the poverty of the plaintiffs, their repeated declaration's that they possessed no property, and that they depended upon their earnings for their support, and…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Marcy, J.

The principal objection relied on in opposition to the motion is, that the newly discovered evidence is cumulative. I find no case in which a very distinct definition is given of cumulative evidence. The courts have sometimes used expressions seeming to warrant the inference that proof which goes to establish the same issue that the evidence on the first trial was introduced to establish, is *582cumulative. If the evidence newly discovered, as well as t^at introduced on the trial, had a direct bearing on the issue, it may be cumulative; but we are not to look at the effect…

2Cited by26 opinions

  1. Newcomb v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Waller v. GravesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1850
  3. Alger v. MerrittSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
  4. Ma Riojas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896
  5. Lampsen v. BranderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API