Bolte v. Van Rooten
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit. Plea, the general . issue. 1 he cause was tried at the sittings in New-York, before the Chief-Justice, on the 14th day of April, 1808. The plaintiff offered in evidence, to support his action, the return to a commission regularly issued under the seal of this court. The caption to the depositions was in the words following, viz.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit. Plea, the general . issue. 1 he cause was tried at the sittings in New-York, before the Chief-Justice, on the 14th day of April, 1808. The plaintiff offered in evidence, to support his action, the return to a commission regularly issued under the seal of this court. The caption to the depositions was in the words following, viz. “ William Hobbins being produced, sworn, and examined as a witness, on interrogatories, to him administered in virtue of and under a commission issued out of and under the seal of the supreme court of judicature of the state of…
1Per curiam
There is a material difference between the facts in this case, and those in the case of Bailis v. Cochran. (2 Johns. Rep. 417.) In that case, the deposition had no caption or conclusion, by which it could appear before whom, and by what authority it was taken. f The commissioners signed their names under that of the witness, with*132out even stating that they were commissioners. But in this case it is stated, that the witness was sworn and examined, by virtue of the commission directed to the commissioners, by name, and they then sign their names, at the bottom of the deposition, qua…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Burnham v. PorterSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852
- Commercial Bank v. Western Reserve BankOhio Supreme Court · 1842
- Kohler v. MattlageThe Superior Court of New York City · 1877
- Tompkins v. MitchellSupreme Court of Virginia · 1824