RODMAN v. HOOPS EX'RS, 1 U.S. 85 (1784)

U.S. Supreme Court

RODMAN v. HOOPS EX'RS, 1 U.S. 85 (1784)

1 U.S. 85 (Dall.)

Rodman et al. ex.
v.
Hoops's ex.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

September Term, 1784

In this cause, the defendant's offered in evidence an entry made in the books of the testator, of money paid in discharge of a promissory note. This was acknowledged to be the orignal entry; but there was no proof by whom it was made, or, whether the person who made it was dead, or alive.

By the Court. Let it be read to the jury; not as evidence that the defendant has paid the note, but merely that such an entry was made nineteen years ago, of the payment of a note of twenty three years standing; and to support the general presumption of payment after such a length of time. Nor is this to be drawn into precedent; for our allowance of the evidence is founded on the particular circumstances of this case.

To prove another point in the same cause, a book was offered, in the form of a ledger, containing, in some instances, referrences to a waste- book. Notwithstanding this, it was insisted, on the one hand, to be an original, and not a transcript; but denied on the other; and the person, who, it was said, could prove it, was incapable of attending on account of sickness.

The Court ordered the book to be read; leaving it to the jury to determine, on the face of it, whether it was an original or transcript; and directing them in the latter case, to pay no regard to it.[ Rodman v. Hoops Ex'rs 1 U.S. 85 (1784)


U.S. Supreme Court

RODMAN v. HOOPS EX'RS, 1 U.S. 85 (1784)

1 U.S. 85 (Dall.)

Rodman et al. ex.
v.
Hoops's ex.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

September Term, 1784

In this cause, the defendant's offered in evidence an entry made in the books of the testator, of money paid in discharge of a promissory note. This was acknowledged to be the orignal entry; but there was no proof by whom it was made, or, whether the person who made it was dead, or alive.

By the Court. Let it be read to the jury; not as evidence that the defendant has paid the note, but merely that such an entry was made nineteen years ago, of the payment of a note of twenty three years standing; and to support the general presumption of payment after such a length of time. Nor is this to be drawn into precedent; for our allowance of the evidence is founded on the particular circumstances of this case.

To prove another point in the same cause, a book was offered, in the form of a ledger, containing, in some instances, referrences to a waste- book. Notwithstanding this, it was insisted, on the one hand, to be an original, and not a transcript; but denied on the other; and the person, who, it was said, could prove it, was incapable of attending on account of sickness.

The Court ordered the book to be read; leaving it to the jury to determine, on the face of it, whether it was an original or transcript; and directing them in the latter case, to pay no regard to it.[ Rodman v. Hoops Ex'rs 1 U.S. 85 (1784)

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.