Waring v. Warren
New York Supreme Court
• THIS cause came before the court on a writ of error, from the common pleas, or Mayor’s court, of the city of New-Tork. An action of trover, for certain goods and chattels, had been prosecuted in the court below, by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error. The defendant below P^ea<^ec^ R16 general issue, and a verdict was found for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
• THIS cause came before the court on a writ of error, from the common pleas, or Mayor’s court, of the city of New-Tork. An action of trover, for certain goods and chattels, had been prosecuted in the court below, by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error. The defendant below P^ea<^ec^ R16 general issue, and a verdict was found for the plaintiff. From the bill of exceptions, tendered by the defendant below, signed and sealed by the judge, the following facts appeared. On the trial, one Gilbert, who was a deputy-sheriff, was sworn as a witness, and proved, that in 1798, by…
1Per curiam
It was not necessary to produce the paper, It was sufficient for the plaintiff to show that he had purchased the goods at auction. It was a paper with which the defendant had nothing to do> and which the plaintiff was not bound to produce. If the defendant wished it, he ought to have taken the proper steps for that purpose, by giving notice to the opposite party to produce it, or that parol evidence would be given of its contents. The objection was properly overruled. The court below were also right, in rejecting the evidence offered by the defendant, of the declarations of Mrs. Nocus made…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Dodge v. Freedman's Savings & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Roebke v. AndrewsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
- Grimm v. HamelNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1859
- King v. WilkinsIndiana Supreme Court · 1858
- Bingham v. HylandNew York Supreme Court · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.