Sluby v. Champlin
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action for money paid, laid out and expended by the plaintiff, for the defendant, at bis request. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, and the statute of limitations. The cause was tried at the last sittings in New-Tork.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action for money paid, laid out and expended by the plaintiff, for the defendant, at bis request. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, and the statute of limitations. The cause was tried at the last sittings in New-Tork. The defendant, on the 15th July, 1794, became bound as principal, to the United States, in the penal sum of 4,620 dollars, for securing certain duties, payable to the United States, on a cargo of salt, imported into Baltimore, amounting to 1,869 dollars and 15 cents, and the plaintiff, at his request, became his surety in the bond. The amount of the bond was paid…
1Opinion of the CourtYates, J.
delivered the opinion of the court. 1. It appears to be a settled principle, and not contested by the counsel on the part of the defendant, that when the witnesses to an instrument are dead, their hand-writing maybe proved. I cannot discover the distinction between such a case, and the one now before us. The witness is without the jurisdiction of the court, and absent in foreign parts, so that it is not in the power of the party to procure his attendance.
The cases adduced, do not establish a contrary doctrine. At most, it appears, that no fixed rule, for some time, existed on this subject in…
2Cited by22 opinions
- United States v. LymanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1818
- Bradford v. Spyker's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Globe Printing Co. v. StahlMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Lessee of Hamilton v. MarsdenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
- Norton v. ShepardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1880
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.