McAllister v. McAllister
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Error to the Marion Circuit. Pet. & Sum., Case 1\. Case stated. The general rule is, that comparison of hand writing is not eompetent evidence.
Read the full summary
Error to the Marion Circuit. Pet. & Sum., Case 1\. Case stated. The general rule is, that comparison of hand writing is not eompetent evidence. (1 Dana, 179.) The Court approve this rule as the most safe and least liable to objection,concurring with the Courts of New York, Virginia and N. Carolina; in opposition to Mass., Maine, and Connecticut. ~The exceptions to the rule — 1st. where writings are of such antiquity as not to be susceptible of proof in the ordinaryway. yet not so old as to prove themselves. 2d. where other writings clearly proved are already before the julytheymay compare —…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Simpson
delivered the opinion of ihe Court.
On the trial of an issue on the plea of non est factum,' .the suit having been brought by petition and summons on a promissory note, the plaintiff having introduced the subscribing witness, whose evidence not being entirely satisfactoiy as to the execution of the note, which, however, was read to the jury, then offered two other notes *270for the payment of money, called a witness who proved their execution, and they were permitted by the Court to go before the jury, to prove by comparison of hand writing, that the note sued on had been signed by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Woodard v. SpillerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1833
3Cited by4 opinions
- Williams v. CongerSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Pierce v. NortheyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Major v. GarrottCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
- Loving v. Warren CountyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1880