Garrott v. Johnson
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from Frederick County Court. This was an action of assumpsit, commenced by the appellee against the appellant, on the 14th March, 1837. The plaintiff declared for goods, &c., sold and delivered; money lent, advanced, and paid; had and received. The defendant pleaded first, non assumpsit. 2nd.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Frederick County Court. This was an action of assumpsit, commenced by the appellee against the appellant, on the 14th March, 1837. The plaintiff declared for goods, &c., sold and delivered; money lent, advanced, and paid; had and received. The defendant pleaded first, non assumpsit. 2nd. That the said Richard, before and at the time of issuing the original writ of the said Richard, in this cause, to wit, on the fourteenth day of March, in the year 1837, at the connty aforesaid, was and from thence, hitherto hath been and still is indebted unto him the said Barton in a much larger…
1Opinion of the CourtStephen, J.
We do not think, that there is any error in the judgment of the court below, from which this appeal has been taken. Two *182bills of exceptions are contained in the record, upon points of evidence, which this court have to decide. We think that the evidence of James E. Wood, as to the facts sworn to, by the deceased witness at the former trial, between the same parties, where the appellant was plaintiff, and the appellee w'as defendant, was admissible to go to the jury in this case. There is nothing we think in the record given in evidence by the plaintiff below, to prove, that in the former…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Cecil v. CecilCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1862
- Whitehurst v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1873
- Royston v. HornerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
- Waters v. WatersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1872
- Beall v. PearreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1859
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.