Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

17 Johns. 272

Baldwin v. Hale

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1820

New York Supreme Court · decided 1820-01-15

THIS was an action of assumpsit, on a promissory note, The declaration, beside a count on the note, contained money counts, and a count on an insimul computassent. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit to the first and second counts, and an account stated, and a note given and received as to the second count; to the third count, a judgment recovered in the Circuit, Court of the United.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1820-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1889

1 district · 2 state decisions

201820183018401850186018701880decided

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 →

Per Curiam.

¶1In the case of Collins v. Lord Matthews, (5 East’s Rep. 473.) it was decided that a plea of nul tiel record, pleaded to an action of debt, on an Irish judgment, must conclude to the country ; for though since the Union such judgment is a record, yet it is only provable by an examined copy on oath, the verity of which is only triable by a jury. The Circuit Court of the United States, in relation to this court, is *218neither a superior nor an inferior court; but is to be regarded as a court of another government Their records, therefore, as to this purpose, are foreign records, and the verity of them must be tried by a jury. The original record of that court cannot be brought here to be inspected by this court; nor can the tenor of it be brought, in by a certiorari or mittimus out of chancery. (1 Chitty’s PI. 537. 1 'Field’s Pr. 691.)

¶2*We are of opinion, therefore, that the objection taken to the conclusion of the replication is well founded, and that the defendant is entitled to judgment on the demurrer: but the plaintiffs have leave to amend.

¶3Judgment for the defendant.

/17/johns/272 · .json · Public domain