1 Dall. 424
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 15, 1789
Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1789-04-15
THE Plaintiff was examining a witness to prove the purpose of an order given to him by the Adjutant General, during the late war, for the restoration of his horse, saddle and bridle, which had been seized by the Defendant, as the property of a disaffected person, although upon trial the Plaintiff was acquitted, when Levy objected, that the order itself ought to be produced, or some account given of its loss, before the witness was admitted to give evidence of its contents.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1789-04-15
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 1890
16 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1The oath of the Plaintiff must be received to prove what has become of the order. It is, I think, the only way in which satisfactory information can be obtained on a point of this nature.
¶2The Plaintiff, being accordingly sworn, and proving the loss of the order, he was allowed to proceed in examining the witness as to its contents.