Jackson ex dem. Wyckoff v. Humphrey
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of ejectment for a lot of land, No. 42, in the township of Ulysses, in the county of Cayuga. The cause was tried at the circuit,, in the county of Cayugar the 27th June, 1805, before Mr. justice Tompkins.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment for a lot of land, No. 42, in the township of Ulysses, in the county of Cayuga. The cause was tried at the circuit,, in the county of Cayugar the 27th June, 1805, before Mr. justice Tompkins. On the trial the defendant offered to prove, by the late judge of the county, before whom the deed of the lessor of the plaintiff was proved by the subscribing witness thereto-, that such proof was taken in Canada, and out of the jurisdiction of this state. The defendant further offered to prove, that the subscribing witness could not have known the facts respecting the…
1Per curiam
The judge before whom the proof of the deed was made, was a competent witness to prove that it was done in Canada ; and if that fact be established, the proof was illegal and void. The oath administered in Canada, was extra-judicial, and of no validity. The judge had no authority to administer an oath out of the jurisdiction of this state, nor could the witness, in such case, be indicted for perjury. Though the judge was a competent witness, *500he would not have been bound to answer any questions impeaching the integrity of his conduct as a public officer. We are of opinion that a new trial…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Gt. W. Turnpike Co. v. . LoomisNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Wilson v. TroupCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1823
- State ex rel. Beach v. SuttonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877
- Mutual Life Insurance v. CoreyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Lander v. BromleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1891
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.