Chase Digest of Law of 00 Step

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chase-digest-of-law-of-00-step 1/435
A DIGEST
SCHOOL OF
upon
the
subject
of
evi-
in this
principles
of
the
citations
of
Mr.
Stephen
dence
last
day
of
on
differs
from
it
in
various
respects.
Lord
Coleridge's
Bill
proposed
a
Lord Coleridge
supplied the
systematic
acquaint-
space of
time, and
on
the
Law
of
Evidence
are
written
the repositories
that
the
be treated independently
than
illustrations
proved
assuming
of negative
was, but
having never
class
then
does
the
word
mean ?
The
and
or
cannot
perhaps
The
following
outline
work
be
given
of
probable,
or
improbable,
of
relevancy,
is
of
which a fact
existence
of
which
he
testifies.
though
secondary
cepted cases
ways, and the
as follows:
of the Law
on
pleading
than
a
whole
subject
of
speaking
generally,
ignorance
of
the
law
seven
years
is
much shorter
plained by those cases.
occasion required.
nor
un-
doubt
is
of
to
a
system, it must, at present at least, be done by private
writers.
Legislation
be
themselves
condition
than
assuming
unstated
principles
of
many
reports
pub-
lished
by
'
cases,
cases
themselves
are
the
rivjtli,
the
following
of
which
is
a
dispcndium.
My
attempt
in
/tY^rt'y<?«/^j,
fallen
into
the
converse
which
they
have
influence
of
vol-
umes
volumes of
understand, and
philosophy of the
this may be, I trust the present work will show
that
assumes
the
be fully
their
places
as
Parliament
(106-1
10).
So,
documentary evidence
gen-
ment
the Statute Book.' At the same time I should warn
any one
of their meaning.
which will
enable not
cares
enough
about
the
TABLE OF
75
De
Kay
v.
Irving
168
Delafield
v.
Hand
I2i
Delaware,
The
193
p.
178
Fellers
v.
Lee
119
190
Leland
v.
Cameron
63
27
xlviii TABLE

36
Oldtown
V.
Shapleigh
72
Oliver
drews
TABLE OF
Co
100,
126
Teese
v.
Huntingdon
233
Tenney
9
Tyler
<^ Fickett
169
Co
42
TABLE OF
LIST OF
LIST OF
L. R. E.
B.
Mon
Ben
Monroe's
Cush
Pleas,
New
York
Code
of
N.
Y.
Daily
Reg..
..New
in
certain
cases.
Art.
10.
business or
of
duty
35.
Art.
48.
Opinion
generally
irrelevant
be
attested
printed
copies]
A DIGEST
STEPHEN'S DIGEST.
tended
to
and
judges
shall
draw
denied on the
right,
irrelevant,
as the
if
any particular fact is or is not part of the
same
transaction
as
the
facts
in
issue
is
a
question
of
law
upon
which
no
principle
has
been
When
a
question
ciple. Gr.
paragraph
to
the
transaction.
Cal.
85
window,
He
was
standing
still
outside.
I
it was not
prisoner's
presence,
was not
the
against
A.^
conspirator,
upon
condition
A's
land.
to
establish
title,
309.
3
Doe
V.
Pulman,
3
Q.
relevant,
Derby
Summer
Assizes,
1865.
In
this
case
it
was
shown
by
a
series
of
family
settlements
that
for
v. Floyd,
act,' or which
act,
deceased is
to
act
in
self-defence,
evidence
»s
received
in
156
deceased
is
only
received
when
the
circumstances
indicate
that
the
defendant
was
Harrington
which
A
the
the
alleged
crime,
A
caused
circumstances
to
exist
a
complaint
soon
irrelevant.'
i86,
190
(he omits the
not admissible, but
V.
in
Ap-
pendix).
The
particulars
of
other
cases
(^Kellcy
v.
People,
55
N.
Y.
565
made
arson.
The
fact
that
at
relevant
FACTS.
Facts
necessary
to
be
known
to
explain
or
introduce
a
fact
in
issue
or
relevant
or
deemed
to
so where
a person on leaving home states his reasons for so doing, such declara-
tions
are
admissible,
found
or
is
evading
service.
Buswell
v.
Lincks,
8
Daly,
518
A DIGEST
when
at
that
time
v.
Doll,
91
to
be
made
in
the
deemed
to
be
rele-
vant.'
which
in New
York several
locket
St.
170
relevant fact.]'
Evidence
that
a
person
having
the
at
the
place
of
B's
residence,
is
deemed
to
be
relevant.]^
{k) [The question is, whether A has been appropriating his employer's
property.
The
services
entirely
irresponsible,
is
deemed
him,
or
that
he
made
a
list
of
his
debts
in
which
this
note
was
not
included,
is
deemed
not
to
be
relevant.]
Evidence
B
are
in
court,
the
non-existence of any
all
the
Judges
in
Mich.
law.
a
right
being
required
value
of
on a
evidence
of
hay
render
the
by
scattering
sparks
destruction
of
improper
rate
safety
to
in
occasion in
stated
m
People
V.
by pledging
at any
prove
done by
B, by
B
on
C's
own
account,
and
not
as
agent'for
A.'
{j
) A
it.
The
fact that public notice of the loss of the property had been
given
in
the
Den. C. C.
As
to
the
relevancy
of
p.
359.
[Cf
Kellogg
\. French,
15
Gray,
354.]
state
of
health,
and
during
his
^
The witness cannot be asked what the outcries of the
injured person in-
Chap. III.]
trolled
by
undue
influence.
by a series of similar
acts, is proved,
or acts,
the question
train
by
lies
h'ennon^
130
Mass.
39.]
to
office
is
deemed
be a relevant
put in
that
the
date
of
the
letter.
Shelburtie
as
a
witness,
and
(b)
which
is
regulate the
suggesting any
or
relevant
or
5
App.
Cas.
623.
2
a
admission, other parts
theless receivable
in evidence.
Moit v.
;
than
that
of
the
299
[McKinney v.
;'
that
party.
the real party
79.]
2
[Thus
the
admissions
of
it
sustains
by one claiming
title, which are
St.
189),
or
as
doctrine
of
100 Mass.
84
prop-
erty,
made
while
he
signment, are
the
name
of
the
obligee.
bailee.
The
defendant
upon
seeing
an
entry
made
in
the
plaintiff's
book
of
account
of land.
made
while
he
held
it,
are
deemed
to
be
assignee
of
a bankrupt is not deemed to be relevant as an admission by him
in
a
proceeding
by
him
as
had
they are
interest
relation to
gest(S. Anderson
etc.
Co.,
83
Pa.
St.
517
makes
partners,
receivable against
remove the bar of
of
such
person.
Wallis
V.
Randall,
8i
N.
Y.
164;
Leiuis
v.
are not
or settle
to es-
or
legatee
against
another
principal,
interest,
or
law
rule
prevails
lish
business
of
admission
by
an
agent.'
contract
of
sale,
is
plaintiff
joint
and
several
the
bill
as
having
been
accepted
by
several
note
took
makes
statements
as
to
sums
S.
13;
McLellan
v.
Cox,
36
Me.
95
554.]
more,
etc.
Co.,
93
U.
S.
527
C.
J.,
4
Camp.
11.
[But
admissions
made
by
States,
380;
People
v.
Lane^
is
substan-
tially
complete.
Com.m.
v.
Pitsinger,
110
Mass.
loi
inducement,
proof
show
it
569
formerly
It was
there
Chap. IV.]
by
an
inducement
collateral
to
the
competent,
if
the
officer
use
the
from
which
the
law
will
presume
that
his
communications
would
be
likely
to
exercise
an
influence
over
the
mind
Murphy
v.
State,
63
Ala.
i
the gaol
reads the
Chap. IV.]
an
induce-
an inducement
he
said
given for
to
tell
a
as
to
reveal
confes-
sions
;
'
may
be
used
Before the
him
89.]
2
R.
V.
'
articles the
excludes
the
declarations.
People
murdered
B.
him.
written
down),
says
have
of
3
Pick.
96),
or
55
resulting
books as
de-
livery,
deceased
relates
rules
but
(who
not
know
them
to
a
register
of
baptisms
that
he
incumbent's
Payne
v.
Hodge,
7
Hun,
612,
71
N.
Y.
598
place.
A
limited
interest
in
any
property
and
opposed
to
such
interest
is
deemed
to
be
relevant
only
as
against
those
writing,
by
or
on
behalf
v.
time
pecuniary
or
deemed to be
relevant as such/
is
unaltered.
3
by the
favor
of
at
a
time
when
indorsement
17
Johns.
182
diverse.
is
charge.
3
paid
rent
marriage
Article
29.
declarations
of will,
by
statute
that
in
v.
condition
mentioned
in
the
next
article)
when
they
custom or mat-
ter of public
300
ment
(2
upon
in
other
States.]
^Sugden\.
St.
Leonards,
devisor
article
is
fully
who
knowl-
edge.
Such
declarations
may
de-
boundaries
of
private
estates
act
the facts stated
citizens of
of Courts,
C.
M.
& R.
929.
2
age, stating
Gr.
Ev.
i.
;
string
round
the
other
evidence
than
the
other strangers are
434
tombstone
(North
Brookjicldv.
to
attend,
disease
or
old
of
diligence
to
not
but
minutes.
Id.)
the
any act of state or any fact of a public
nature is
contained
be
de-
fendants
in
the
other.
2 on
fact
of
a
by
the
public,
of
the
place
in
which
such
record,
book,
or
register
is
kept,
is
itself
deemed
5
App.
Ca
623
27,
Illustration
(f),
ante.
The books of a private corporation are of the nature of public
books
as
,
^§
competent evidence in favor
of a
155-6.
boundaries
5
T. &
souri
and
is
referred
a title under
Water Power
Co. v.
the public
canals in
generally
a
witness.
Davis
Pintjcy v. Caliill,
can-
;
price current list, appearing from extrinsic evidence to be reliable,
is
competent
to
prove
is
be
proved
in
the
manner
prescribed
in
Part
II.
Illustrations.
damages against
lost
Chap. IV.]
as executor to B, sues C for a debt due
from
C
to
B.
a competent Court
is wholly void
determination
by
ministrator valid
which
entitled
him
to
such
judgment
is
conclusive
but also
Chap. IV.]
conclude
parties
and
privies,
must
Afc-
Neal,
109
U.
S.
426
113 ;
N.
Y.
brought {Quackenbush
v. Ehle,
so as
to present
A/arks,
19
Hun,
325
the merits
in special
ground
in
another
court
whose
Afterwards there
Pleas,
A
obtains
judgment
on
the
he
had
paid
for
premium
and
Relief
bed-quilts
and
obtains
judgment.
This
con-
version
recover
the
value
of
B to
recover the
title was in
in
for
fraud
in
obtaining
a
credit
though
as
to
par-
ties
and
privies
but
even
as
to
all
the
certain
lands
in
Kent
had
been
) The question is, whether A, a shipowner, has broken a
warranty
to
B,
court
the
^
((/)
C
is
rightfully
entitled
97
issue,
in
any
subsequent
proceeding.
an
estoppel.'
Illustrations.
deepening
the
the
flow
many
States
English
rule.
Clink
v.
Thurston,
47
Feversha9n v.
relevant as
where
v.
Hooney,
58
N.
Y.
463
A recovers judgment.
against
B
of
the
city's
liability
to
satisfaction
(not
otherwise)
is
available
exchange
B's
A.
service
•
against another to obtain indemnity. Heiser v. Hatch, 86 N.
Y.
614
is
not
binding
held concluded by such judgments (in the absence of fraud
or
collusion),
though
neces-
sity
sub-
mitted
to
show
B is
afterwards prosecuted
land.
A
been
trespassed
91
U.
S.
238
such a
therefore,
controvert
it.
Lezy
v.
People,
80
conviction before
against
direct
record
itself,
record
jurisdiction,
notwithstanding
this
contra-
collaterally
for
case bring
{Ross
in this
country ranked
(^Thompson v. IVkttman,
this chapter.^
or
V. Abendroth,
questions to
Chap, v.]
will may state
insanity, in
witness may
102 A
tort or
breach of
by the
plaintiff from
the act
ob-
their opinions
on
this
point,
or other services,
as
respects
the
value
loi
Mass.
173.
Evidence
47
Pa.
St.
28.
science or art,
Allen,
146.
But
77
proving the
Code
Civ.
Pr.
foreign
countries.
Id.
what the
of
law.
Hackett
V.
Potter,
135
Mass.
349
in
statement of
8 Allen,
either
wrong
or
contrary
to
law.
admitted
documents
sort
and
Chap, v.]
THE LAW
an
paper has the appearance of wadding shot from a gun.
The opinion
deemed to
1856)
evidence
was
the
letter
is
in
the
A
has
afterwards,
by
words
or
acts,
ac-
knowledged
214,
may
be
made
by
experts
to
by
the
jury
as
corroborative
evidence,
but
not
by
experts.
Berryhill
v.
Kirchner,
96
it
for
com-
parison.
Chandler
v.
Le
Barron,
45
Me.
534
; Bronner
v.
based
are
also
deemed
to
the
person
accused
has
of
particular
acts
by
law :
previous conviction,
absolutely
to
be
tendered
can
always
be
obtained
credit.
[Evidence
to
in
marriage,
and
(except
as
otherwise
stated).
ticular trait
law of
iia A
State
when
such
laws
are
properly
applicable
courts.
(2)
The
existence
of
the
legislature,
the
time
and
place
of
its
ses-
sions,
>
or
33
8/19/2019 Chase Digest of Law of 00 Step
same
State,
court.
Eyster
v.
Gaff,
91
U.
S.
521
be
to
pro-
duce
the
see
Piper
v.
Chappell^
14
505-7,
contains
some
remarks
by
Lord
Justice
Mellish
degrees to be
;
as
e.g.
other courts
of
their
seals
and
ordinances
of
state
own State
S.
546 ;
Askcraft
v.
Chapman,
38
Ct.
230.]
functions,
and
when
certificate,
or
other
judicial
or
State
courts
[Farley
Chap. VII.J
THE LAW
OF EVIDENCE.
seals
mentioned
in
of
London,'
and
;
^
abbreviations
sunset
diction
intoxicating. Id.
reference for
his satis-
hearing,
write
recognized.
126 A
alleged
to
grounds
on
which
that
opinion
is
held,
it
must
be
the
evidence
of
the
person
who
holds
by
primary
articles
66
and
67
each counter-
98
in proper
stroyed.
Lewis
v.
Payn,
Chap. IX.]
of
such
a
before the
is
by
purpose
of
proving
the
handwriting
of
there
v. Wood,
before
Chap. IX.]
before that
of a
paitycan be
393
Clark
v.
Boyd,
by
more
in
a
;
*
is receivable
21 Me.
as
doubtful
whether the rule extends to instruments executed by corporations, or to
deeds enrolled
under the
of the
witness, or as
for
the
532;
Hanson
after
being
served
with
been
sworn
as
;
'
client (Brandt
in
399.
The
loss
uineness
of
the
lost
instrument
is
required,
in
order
that
secondary
evi-
dence
maybe
56
N.
Y.
618;
Krise
w.
Neason,
law in force for the
time being
fact
to
be
proved
is
Burney v.
the safest course
facts rendering
be
pro-
cured
Thayre,
19
Wend.
166.
As
to
counterparts,
see
Poignard
v.
Smith,
8
Pick.
272;
control.
Roberts
v.
Spencer,
123
Mass.
397
is
privileged.
Bonesteel
278,
but
Chap. X.]
person
reading
the copy, and it
i-
$507.
and other books,
copies in
the broader
sense of
or
signature
required
for
its
authentication
or
of
the
official
character
of
the
person
who
appears
contents,' pro-
common
law
principle.
Gr.
Ev.
i.
525
State or
a
chief
is
authorized
of
Bump's
Fed.
Pro.,
pp.
566-616.
The
attestation
comes)
tified
by
the
court
or
office
in
any
other
State
or
of the
there
state, the
it
shall
be
further
his
office,
that
State, Territory,
See
N.
Y.
Code
Civ.
Pro.
States and of the
the
United
States,
and
Brown,
such
the
i.
58
(i),
ante
; see
also
Art.
49,
note
2.]
by
to
the
proof
of
executive
decrees
is
presumed
which
it
bears
date,'
and
if
which
date
{People
V.
Snyder,
41
N.
Y.
397)
evidence
stamps
upon
written
article, are
based upon
these forms. If,
presumed that the
instrument was regularly
River
to
its
execution
upon
custody
of
the
Dunlap,
5
Lans.
365;
but
held
that
un-
authorized
alterations
by
the
document,
the
or
position of property, has been
reduced to the form of a docu-
ment or series of documents,
no
evidence
con-
are admissible
139
did
or
disposition
81
excluded
by
have legal effect as a con-
tract,
or
other
disposition
of
property.'
whether
indorsed
not
be
proved
by
the
production
is
lost.
by a deed
in the
that
that such a mistake was made as would entitle him
to
have
the
contract
reformed.*
{d)
A
lets
land
A
{Bank
V.
Kennedy,
17
Wall.
19)
1 66
C.
It
is
verbally
agreed
do
of
a
docu-
must
be
construed
accord-
of the
doctrine, see
Brawley v.
of the
inaccurate
de-
than
I70 A
outside
of
the
ship
on
the
quarter.
like
these,
varied. Butler v.
have
been
ad-
missible.'
but the
by the
call them Bowden.
intended.*
relationship to
niece,
Gord,
an-
Evidence both of
given
to
same motive
were.'
Article
92.*
than
that
of
other
cases
both
before
and
after
it
were
elaborately
considered
Hall,
i
Dru. &
War.
94,
111-133.
See,
too,
must
prove
that
those
is
directly
doubt.
rules
applies
in
civil
cases,
a preponderance of
afterwards,
heard
of
afterwards.
of
33;
of ex-
change. The
is
shown
to
have
been
in
possession
presence of
not
v.
N.
V.
Life
46
N.
Y.
271
179
parents.'
(cc)
[A
guilty. The
not shift the burden.
i8o A
A's
land.
The
burden
of
prov-
ing
that
the
ditch
adjacent
is on the
Article
96.
The
burden
of
proof
as
bur-
proved
which
may
be
possessed
by
345-6
and
was
obliged
639,
other
fact
is
bration of
is
conclusive
physical
con-
dition
is
a
competent
witness
their having
or not
number
to
the
>
of
to
a
order in which two or more persons died who are
shown
to
might have
had a
lawful origin
the
Crown
or
from
not
Angus
V.
Dalton,
1 86
successively
occupied
from
1754
to
1792
or
1793,
title)
from
1793
to
1809.
a right
to erect
to
such
a
current
running back
d. Devine v.
discarded
exceed
their
affected
Chap. XIV.]
them
from
such
bailee,
agent,
or
licensee.'
a consignee
or endorsee
fact
his
4
C.
B.
56
N.
Y.
544;
Kings.
Richards,
never
actually
put
on
(2)
sideration
upon
the
deny the
which
he
but
administrator,
the successor
in in-
a
personal
may give
to
States,
wife
or
husband,
and
every
will
punish
false
through
judgment or
wife
of
is an
by
%
Comm.,
85
Pa.
St.
127.
As
to
to
highway,
Gr.
Ev.
i.
see
Art.
98,
aute.^
parties
and
their
husbands
and
wives
are
competent
witnesses,
provided
that
no
wit-
ness
in
monly
allowed
to
testify,
but
special
limitations
other,
if
living.
Id.
to be
when
he
Chap. XV.
510;
witness to
testi-
$
official
department concerned,'
of persons
pub-
lic
other
per-
that
the
testimony
of
Bridgewater
v.
Plymouth,
97
Mass.
382
48
111.
54
or
explanation
of
acts
and
declarations
made
by
trial (Hewett v.
country,
Chap. XV.]
THE LAW
OF EVIDENCE.
legal adviser's
becomes
a
criminal
—a
conspirator
or
v.
Jones,
58
N.
H.
328),
or
have
been
embezzled,
which
entry
was
not
in
the
book
at
the
commence-
been
agent
required to
Chap. XV.]
knowledge
which
counsel
acquired
this country,
is
provided
that
the
testimony
of
physicians
to
250
is
entitled
to
refuse
to
paper, and
as to
party to give
be
bound
to
produce
pro-
duced
by
putting
them
in
the
latter's
possession.
People
v.
Sheriff,
29
Barb.
622.
But
papers
which
court
119
Mass.
290).
But
in
England
a
partial
which made the
would not. [To
9
cor-
roborated
by
some
on appeal by any
respectively.
8
under promise of marriage
If
two
or
only
evidence
against
that
of treason
unless on
to
the
glish
law :
answer denies the allegations of the
bill,
the
bill,
will
that a
any Court
referred
to
consti-
tutes
perjury.
Id.
Chap. XVI.]
science, make the
following promise and
declares
all
such
witnesses
kissing
the
book,
simply
raises
his
hand
article
is
or
2i6 A
DIGEST OF
preliminary hearing
{a) upon affidavit,
circumstances
accused
in
some
States
provide
for
the
examination
before
necessary,
before
trial
is
of
a
commission
to
other
person
or
persons,
appointed
taken
according
foreign

will comply with
such a request, but will not aid commissioners, and then the
use
of
let-
ters
rogatory
relate
to
follows
the
Judicature
Act,
1875,
and
has no right to decide on the validity of objections
taken
to
particular
affidavit
is
liable
for
the
reading
of
anything
in
to the reading
examined
in
observed
party
calling
him,
in
which
remove
the
witnesses.
A
party's
who
gener-
be
unfavorable
to
such
party.
Scovill
v.
Baldwin,
27
Ct.
316
facts),
declara-
tion
as
hereinbefore
mentioned
for
the
purpose
of
giving
evi-
cross-
examination,
and
if
it
does
so,
the
parties
have
the
right
of
further
cross-examination
party
to
see
the
A DIGEST
the
evidence
given
direct
examination
is
fault
see
is known
with-
Stokes
v.
Johnson,
57
N.
Y.
673
this
country
that
the
cross-examination
differently
452 ;
is
to
introduce
all
the
evidence
to
prove
he
closes
Griffiths,
i
Keyes,
53
disgraceful
Court
127,
no error unless
court's
discretion.]
denies
or
does
^
in
buy-
He
a
duly
authenticated
copy,
and
not
by
cross-examination
may
be
as to
his conviction
sufficiently to
402
Chap. XVI.]
with
A
several
what he had sworn
about the
B's
testimony
would
be
receivable.
not followed
in this
the
state-
ments made by him in a letter or other writing, without
showing it to him.
in
evidence
of proof
other
persons
come
from
would
believe
veracity
{Sargent
v.
Wilson,
59
N.
H.
396
9
v.
Mather,
4
Wend.
229
Walton
v.
e.xam-
ined
in
much
other
occasions
with
the
prisoner,
and
if
she
denies
38
Md.
15)
received,
in
whatever
way
a
witness
may
be
impeached
{Comm. V.
State,
8
O.
St.
643
matter
transaction
concerning
which
he
is
questioned,
correct.'
cases in
may
properly
in
evi-
dence,
upon
his
authenticating
its
genuineness
v.
Mitchell,
68
is
produced
to,
and
inspected
by,
the
party
party.
Chap. XV'll.]
person
against
whom
it
that
it
was
accused,
accused,
upon
the
trial
it
is
proposed
might
have
utes
in
Chap. XVI
Kingdom.
3.
possession,
4.
of
the
in
ture
of
the
judge,
magistrate,
or
consular
officer
before
whom
it
ture
or
to criminal cases
ones
I
have
to
each
;
from
the
same
inflammation
of
relevant
to
each
other
as
possible
it must
fact which shows
unac-
counted
for
the state
though
limiting
in
of
Act may be inferred
v.
the
evidence
given
against
the
German,
Miiller,
executed
for
murdering
Mr.
Briggs
on
arise
upon
it
at
others.
NOTE
11.
that
on wagers
which the Court refused to try, or in which they arrested judgment,
because the
a
to the
as that
conspire
to
commit
an
offence,
each
makes
Judges,
those
asserted
that
land
belongs
to
(see
article
40).
The existence of the deeds is thus the very fact
which
is
to
be
proved.
Mr.
Best
in
1839.
not
to
draw
also
fails,
which
he
is
not
a
party.
Il-
lustrations
ing either
of
his
whole
life
prominence
to
the
more
frequently
the
true
character
of
v.
Cray
(Illustration
evidence,
indeed,
seemed
found
942
cognizance of
saved
from
illustrated
by
a
passage
same
pre-
cautions
vessel,
are not
appears
to
excluded
because
contract for
missions which,
parties
evidence
discourse
or
series of
is
necessary
for
the
full
understand-
could be
in
drawing
to
read
394-7,
an
inducement
40-3,
witness on
oath, his
nations before
why
it
Ev.
169-197
are
collected
in
the
works
referred
to
practice both
of the
Northern and
doubted
(4
Camp.
419,
A.D.
181
1).
This
shows
how
very
modern
a
report
that
some
deceased
person
had
for
rob-
interval be-
tween the two trials an important witness who had not
been
called
our
the question of the effect of the
pleas
the judgments
English
520-8
the truth
is to
458-67,
and
T.
E.
ss.
4-20,
same effect. It
14,
which
might
grand-
father
C
had
told
B
that
D,
C's
elder
brother,
died
without
issue,
A's
statement
must
be
proved
must be
proved in
swears that another has a good charactei , he
means that
particularly
recollect
what
people,
speak
well
of
him,
though
he
does
not
recollect
all
that
they
said.
following
character-
istic
must
first
this
is
deed
held that the
these
statements.
They
show
I
think,
following
while
article
91
deals
with
the
contract
of
marine
in-
surance
on
goods,
a condition
to
be
given
be
regarded
agreement between
document itself. The two opera-
tions are obviously different,
and their proper performance
Notes.] THE
think,
difficult
either
to
state,
to
un-
derstand,
or
to
remember
Frauds.
It
was
Statute of
to
mark
sufficiently
the Law
268 A
are
not
restricted
to
wills.
It
will,
I
cited by the
between
the
rule
315.
In
pointed
opinion
(p.
319)
Charter
judgment in the later case
oiAllgoodv.
Blake,
L.
all
material
facts
and
to
which
he
is
to
will, and then to de-
clare what
is the
for
der
to be uncertain
of which was to give a legacy to a person
whom
the
named or
refutation
of
intention?
this would
belong
either
to
presumptions,
more
or
less
incidents
proof
of
pre-
sumption,
extensive
collection
of
cases
act causing fraud.
be difficult to find a better illustration of the gradual
way
of
competency
as to the
obso-
lete.
The
history
of the subject is to be found in Mr. Best's
work,
ii.
ss.
132-188.
See,
too,
i Ph. Ev.
fortiori,
a
child
cases
and
proceedings
instituted
repealed
by
32
reasons
improper
tliat
those
who
conduct
a
case
as
advocates
should
be
called
as
wit-
nesses
in
it.
Cases,
however,
every part
disclose
them
I
shall
receive
them
in
evidence
{obiter,
in
Broad
however private,
inquired into
slight
wound
upon
?
:
prove
adverse,
contradict
by
stances
subject-matter
he
did
occasion,
must
be
men-
the
law.
In
Greenough
v.
Ec-
cles,
5
C.
been
than
certain
cases.
(Effect
given
in
articles
106
Persons accused of crime, and their husbands and wives, not
to
32
Wills.)
S.
S.
7.
Mode
or
in
the
colonies,
without
proof
of
seal,
etc.,
admissible
in
all.
(Ar-
ticle
80.)
S.
12.
Proof
of
registers
of
British
passed for
conscientious
Scotland.
33
of Evidence
17
other
Commissioners
of Inland Revenue may be proved in any legal proceeding
by
the
pro-
by
the
Com-
missioners
of
bank
of Her
to
such
pro-
ceedings.
He
also
adds :
In
case (/ )
the
copies
ordinary
entry
and
examined
Justice
appearing to
such
or before
any judge
The
the second column
to
force
in
every
such
colony
tary
of
the
Post
Office
{32
Notes.] THE
LAW OF
other
judicial
proceedings
of
any
Court
of
Justice
in
any
foreign
state
or
in
any
either
l)y
examined
copies
or
by
copies
authenticated
treaty, or
;
Court,
be
admissible
in
of
the
for-
such judge must attach to his signature a statement in
writing on the
dence, without any
bills
re-
served
by
passed
and
assented
to,
or
his
posses-
sion,
competent,
42.
of
party
to
a
proceeding,
42.
of
person
suing,
46.
effect
of
upon
47.
50.
grantee,
43.
160.
not
being
clerk,
204.
204.
privilege
203,
205.
nor
facts
which
he
privi-
leged
in
suits
documents
which
client
could
be
whom,
in
the
absence
courts,
288.
Commissioners,
217.
Commissions
provable,
103,
104.
Communications
during
of,
17,
19,
251.
Book
Entries.)
Courts,
rules,
records,
Crime,
burden
of
proof
other,
etc.,
25,
34,
35.
must
be
bind
another
devisee,
47.
evidence,
138.
attested,
to execu-
132.
when
document
Dogs,
188,
189.
title,
190.
of
licensee
to
deny
licensor's
title,
190,
191.
of
acceptor
of
bill
of
exchange,
191.
noticed,
121.
43.
Information as
be
explained
by
parol,
168,
171-
oral
evidence
of
78.
when
to
be
split,
86,
89.
defences
93,
95.
not
matters
not
to
decide,
97.
98.
impeachable
etc.,
99,
100.
proof
of,
147,
by
courts,
118,
119.
of
of
foreign
admiralty
courts,
of
notaries
country,
words
estate
value
of,
72-
negligence,
26.
aliter,
in
some
States,
34.
whether
system
or
Nonsuit,
law
45,
49.
effect
186.
of
a
right
to
percolating
waters,
186.
grantee's
hands,
155.
of
the
187.
•
-
94, 95.
44.
i
indorsement
of
14.
Queen's
crime, 211.
130.
122.
33-35.
Technical
words,
explained
actions for,
evidence,
208.
Undue
influence
in
by
conclusion
of
law,
127.
ioo.
225.
or
in
England
and
some
sustained
because
the
testimony
of
his,
234.
or
when
he
is
impeached
by
proof
is received

Date post:	08-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	zjahangeer
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Chase Digest of Law of 00 Step

Documents