DAVISON'S LESSEE v. BLOOMER, 1 U.S. 123 (1785)

U.S. Supreme Court

DAVISON'S LESSEE v. BLOOMER, 1 U.S. 123 (1785)

1 U.S. 123 (Dall.)

Davison's Lessee
v.
Bloomer

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

April Term, 1785

A Deed, attested by two witnesses, one of whom had married the Lessor of the plaintiff, the other residing within the County and not produced, was offered in evidence, upon proof of the hand writing of the witnesses.

Hartly objected, that it would be better evidence to prove the execution of the deed by the absent witness, not interested; and, therefore, this ought not to be allowed.

Yeates contended, that if a witness is incapaciated either by his own act, or by the act of God, proof the hand writing is sufficiently as where a witness has been convicted of perjury.

By the Court. There is a case in Strange where a party, who was a witness to a bond, afterwards became interested, and, although the proof of his hand writing was admitted, yet there must, likewise, have been proof that the other witness could not be found. The best evidence of which the case reasonably admits has not been offered; and, therefore, we cannot allow the deed to be read on this occasion.[ Davison's Lessee v. Bloomer 1 U.S. 123 (1785) ]


U.S. Supreme Court

DAVISON'S LESSEE v. BLOOMER, 1 U.S. 123 (1785)

 1 U.S. 123 (Dall.)

Davison's Lessee
v.
Bloomer

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

April Term, 1785

A Deed, attested by two witnesses, one of whom had married the Lessor of the plaintiff, the other residing within the County and not produced, was offered in evidence, upon proof of the hand writing of the witnesses.

Hartly objected, that it would be better evidence to prove the execution of the deed by the absent witness, not interested; and, therefore, this ought not to be allowed.

Yeates contended, that if a witness is incapaciated either by his own act, or by the act of God, proof the hand writing is sufficiently as where a witness has been convicted of perjury.

By the Court. There is a case in Strange where a party, who was a witness to a bond, afterwards became interested, and, although the proof of his hand writing was admitted, yet there must, likewise, have been proof that the other witness could not be found. The best evidence of which the case reasonably admits has not been offered; and, therefore, we cannot allow the deed to be read on this occasion.[ Davison's Lessee v. Bloomer 1 U.S. 123 (1785) ]

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.