M'Carty v. Sherman
New York Supreme Court
IN error on certiorari, from a justice’s court. The defendant in error brought an action of debt on a judgment for 17 dollars and 79 cents, obtained before another justice, against the plaintiffs in error. The plea was mil tiel record. On the trial,'a certificate of the judgment, under the hand and seal of the former justice, was produced, but was not proved, except by a witness who testified to the hand-writing. It was read in evidence, though objected to by the defendant.
Read the full summary
IN error on certiorari, from a justice’s court. The defendant in error brought an action of debt on a judgment for 17 dollars and 79 cents, obtained before another justice, against the plaintiffs in error. The plea was mil tiel record. On the trial,'a certificate of the judgment, under the hand and seal of the former justice, was produced, but was not proved, except by a witness who testified to the hand-writing. It was read in evidence, though objected to by the defendant. There was also a difference of 8 cents in the sum mentioned in the certificate, and the debt stated in the declaration,…
1Per curiam
The objection to the certificate of the former justice, as evidence, was well founded. It ought to have been proved by the justice himself, who gave the judgment, or a sworn copy of his minutes should have been produced. In the case of Kellogg v. Mauney, the evidence of the certificate was not objected to, and was, therefore, considered as admitted. The judgment below must be reversed.
Judgment reversed.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Snyder v. WiseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848
- Pratt v. PeckhamNew York Supreme Court · 1855
- Forsaith v. ClarkSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1850