Legal Opinion

Goldstone v. Davidson

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1861PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from the Fourth District. Action for goods sold and delivered against Meyer Davidson and Lewis Davidson, composing the firm of Davidson & Bro. One only of the defendants answered, and set up his discharge in insolvency by a decree of the Sixteenth District Court.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Fourth District. Action for goods sold and delivered against Meyer Davidson and Lewis Davidson, composing the firm of Davidson & Bro. One only of the defendants answered, and set up his discharge in insolvency by a decree of the Sixteenth District Court. On the trial, to support his plea, he offered in evidence certified copies of his petition, schedule, affidavit, and of all the other papers necessary in proceedings in insolvency, including a decree of final discharge. These papers were separately certified by the Clerk of the Sixteenth District Court. Plaintiffs objected to…

1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.

Baldwin, J. concurring.

The Court erred in excluding the evidence offered by Meyer Davidson to prove his discharge in insolvency. This evidence consisted of a certified copy of the decree, and of each of the papers composing the record of the proceedings. It was excluded upon the ground that these separate papers should have been attached together, and the whole certified as one record. This would undoubtedly have been the proper mode of exemplification; but we think the mere fact that the papers composing the record were certified separately was not sufficient to authorize their rejection.…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Railroad Bank v. EvansSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API