Legal Opinion

Conklin v. Stamler

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided June 15, 1859PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from a judgment. The facts appear in the opinions.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.—Brady, J.

The only proof made in the court below, was that the plaintiff had no clerk or book-keeper, and that persons dealing with him had settled with him by his books. There is no evidence either that the defendant dealt with him, or of the delivery of any one of the articles named in the bill of items. The courts have required, in similar cases, that a foundation should be laid for the introduction of this kind of evidence, which consists of proof that the plaintiff had no clerk; that some of the articles charged have been delivered ; that the books produced are the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Vosburgh v. ThayerNew York Supreme Court · 1815
  2. Sickles v. MatherNew York Supreme Court · 1838
  3. Case v. PotterNew York Supreme Court · 1811
  4. Nolley v. HolmesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1842

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Roche v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Taggart v. FoxNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882
  3. Warner Quinlan Co. v. Ben Charat, Inc.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1932
  4. Rexford v. ComstockNew York Supreme Court · 1888

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

Powered by the Exa API