The Samuel

Feb. 3th.

Decided Feb 11th

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1818-02-11

This, cause, being -an instance, or revenue c?iuse, had been ordered to farther proof at a former term.a now offered to produce a witness to be examined, viva voce, in open-court on farther proof; butthe court, for the sake, of convenience, ordered his-deppsition to be taken in writing out of court.

1 counsel of record

Relies on The San Pedro

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed · 7–0 · Decided 1818-02-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1894

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 →

¶1(Practice.)

¶2A witness offored to be examined, viva voce, in open court,- in an instance cause, ordered to be examined out of court.

¶3This, cause, being -an instance, or revenue c?iuse, had been ordered to farther proof at a former term.a

¶4Mr. Baggett, for the claimants,

¶5now offered to produce a witness to be examined, viva voce, in open-court on farther proof; butthe court, for the sake, of convenience, ordered his-deppsition to be taken in writing out of court.

¶7Mr. Chief Justice Marshall

¶8delivered the opinion of the court, reversing the decree ,of condemnation in the court below, and ordering the property to be restored as claimed.'

¶9Decree reversed.