The London Packet
Supreme Court of the United States
stated, that there was an affidavit anr néxed to the record, which was taken under the order for farther proof, in the court below, but which, not arriving until after the decree of condemnation was pronounced, was ordered by the circuit court, to be transmitted, de bene esse, for the consideration of this court.
Read the full summary
stated, that there was an affidavit anr néxed to the record, which was taken under the order for farther proof, in the court below, but which, not arriving until after the decree of condemnation was pronounced, was ordered by the circuit court, to be transmitted, de bene esse, for the consideration of this court. He farther stated, that he had additional proofs, taken since that time, to be used in this-court; and he asked whether he should now be permitted to read these proofs, in order to show .what was the nature of the evidence which existed, to clear away any former doubts in the cause;…
1Opinion of the Court
[Mr. Chief Justice Marshall.
The court is of opinion that the-affidavit transmitted from, the circuit. court may be now read. But as to the new proof now offered by the claimant, it is the practice of this court to hear the cause in the first instance, upon the evidence transmitted from the circuit court, and to decide upo,n that evidence whether it is proper to allow farther proof. The new proof cannot, therefore, be now read; but, as the opposite party wishes it, the counsel may state the nature of the proof, though not the contents, thereof in detail. If the ease shall ultimately appear…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hollins v. WilkieDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021