Jackson ex dem. Woodruff v. Shepherd
New York Supreme Court
Ejectment, for part of a military lot, in Cicero, Onondaga county; tried at the circuit in that county, March, 1826, before Throop, C. Judge. At the trial, in the course of the plaintiff’s evidence, it became necessary for him to prove a deed deposited in, and belonging to the clerk’s office of the county of Cayuga, pursuant to statute. The execution of this deed was proved under a commission executed in Connecticut.
Read the full summary
Ejectment, for part of a military lot, in Cicero, Onondaga county; tried at the circuit in that county, March, 1826, before Throop, C. Judge. At the trial, in the course of the plaintiff’s evidence, it became necessary for him to prove a deed deposited in, and belonging to the clerk’s office of the county of Cayuga, pursuant to statute. The execution of this deed was proved under a commission executed in Connecticut. The clerk of Cayuga attended with, and exhibited tbe deed before the commissioners; and a copy of the deed was annexed to the commission, but not the original. The latter was,…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per
Savage, Ch. J.
The act regulating the execution of commissions, (1 R. L. 520, s. 11,) requires that all exhibits produced to the commissioners, and proved by any witness, shall be annexed to the commission, and returned to the court, closed up and under the seals of twm or more of the commissioners. In Jackson v. Hobby, (20 John. 361,) Platt, J. who delivered the opinion of the court, says of this act, “ when a statute makes innovations on the common law rules of evidence, its positive requirements must be strictly complied with.” But in this ease, a literal compliance was…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Beckwith v. TalbotSupreme Court of Colorado · 1875
- Howard v. Orient Mutual InsuranceThe Superior Court of New York City · 1862
- Miller v. LivingstonNew York Supreme Court · 1803