¶1THE COURT (nem. con.) instructed the jury, that upon this issue on a plea in abatement, it is not necessary for the defendant to prove that the plaintiff knew of a partnership between the defendant and any other person, nor that Mandeville was his partner at the time of the contract, that fact not being in issue.
18 F. Cas. 458
Norwood v. Sutton
U.S. District Court
Decided July 15, 1806
U.S. District Court · decided 1806-07-15
Assumpsit for freight of ■ goods. Plea in abatement, that tbe promise, if any, was made by the defendant jointly with one John Mandeville. moved for a continuance of the cause on affidavit. THE COURT thought the affidavit not sufficient, and refused to receive a supplemental affidavit, on the ground that it is a practice leading to perjury. THE COURT referred to the case of Dawson v. Boyd [Case No. 3,-667], at Washington, on a habeas corpus from Alexandria.
Decided 1806-07-15