Ducoign v. Schreppel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Indebitatus assumpsit for cooper’s work done in St. Domingo for the defendant; the balance claimed being 490 dollars. Pleas, non assumpsit and payment. The plaintiff was sworn to the original entries in his day book; and a contest arose, whether these entries were any evidence of the prices of the work.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Cur.
We have often heard this point agitated at the bar, and we think with little reason.
We are of opinion that day books are not only evidence of the delivery of goods, but of their prices also, prima facie. How else could the prices of broad cloths, linen, cambric, &c. of different degrees of fineness be ascertained, after a length of time? A contrary doctrine would render our usage of small advantage to the mercantile or mechanical part of the community.
But the evidence arising from the books, does not preclude either party from going into other proof. The matter as to prices is left…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Landis v. TurnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Corr v. SellersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
- Carman v. DunhamSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1830
- Sabo v. Stefan, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northampton County1922