Voris v. Smith
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Bedford county, in which a verdict and judgment were rendered in favour of the plaintiffs below, the defendants in error, William Smith, and dignes, his wife, in an ejectment against the plaintiffs in error, and the defendants below, Peter Voris, and the heirs of William Crabb, deceased.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Bedford county, in which a verdict and judgment were rendered in favour of the plaintiffs below, the defendants in error, William Smith, and dignes, his wife, in an ejectment against the plaintiffs in error, and the defendants below, Peter Voris, and the heirs of William Crabb, deceased. The case was called on for trial at a special court, held at Bedford, before Baird, President of the fourteenth district, and the’associate judges of Bedford county, and the defendants objected to the trial of the cause, on the ground that the case was not…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, J.
That the special court had jurisdiction, does not admit of a question. The certificate of Judge Huston was competent and satisfactory evidence to show his interest, but not to show that the cause was not depending. That could be shown only by inspecting the record. Our judicial records are brought to a bad pass, indeed, if the evidence of a judgment of nonsuit is in any gase'to be found only in the recollection of witnesses.
Nor do I allow more weight to the bill of exceptions, for rejecting the depositions. To decide on the evidence of…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Harper v. Farmers' & Mechanics' BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
- Norton v. NortonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
- Butler v. OwenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1847