Glenn v. Rogers
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from Baltimore county court. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the appellee, to recover money loaned by his intestate to the appellant.The pica was non assumpsit, with notice of set-off.’ 1st Exception.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Baltimore county court. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the appellee, to recover money loaned by his intestate to the appellant.The pica was non assumpsit, with notice of set-off.’ 1st Exception. The plaintiff proved that the defendant,' Glenn, purchased a mare from one Barber, for $250, and on' the next day, by a written order, dated 20th of October 1845, requested Rogers, the plaintiff’s intestate, to advance the money for him to Barber, which Rogers did. Proof was then offered by defendant tending to prove that he bought the mare from Barber with a warranty of…
1Opinion of the CourtTuck, J.
We are of opinion that the defendant did not lay a proper foundation for the introduction of parol proof of the contents of the letter mentioned in. the first bill of exceptions. Before secondary evidence can be received the.court should be satisfied that a reasonable opportunity has been afforded the opposite party to produce the original. The notice was served when the jury was about being drawn, and when the plaintiff could not have complied, in all probability, unless the paper was in court, which does not appear to have been the fact. Whether, if the paper had been in court, the notice…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Elder v. WarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1826
- Conolly v. Kettlewell & WilsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1843
- Beeler v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1814
- Mulliken v. BoyceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1843
3Cited by4 opinions
- Dana v. StanfordsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Stahelin v. SowleMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Bentz v. ColtonBaltimore City Orphans' Court · 1900
- McClanahan's Administrator v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1918