MCKIMM v. RIDDLE, 2 U.S. 100 (1788)
2 U.S. 100 (Dall.) M'Kimm et al. Executors Supreme Court of Pennsylvania May Sessions, 1788U.S. Supreme Court
MCKIMM v. RIDDLE, 2 U.S. 100 (1788)
v.
Riddle*
Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Pleas, non assumpsit, payment , &c.
The plaintiffs, having proved the contract, were called on to produce their Letters Testamentary; but the Counsel insisted, that although they had them, they were not bound to produce them on the present issue.
By the Court: It is not necessary, under the pleas in this cause, to produce the Letters Testamentary. If the defendant wished to have them produced, he should have pleaded, and put the matter in issue.
Footnotes
[Footnote *] Ruled at Carlisle Nisi Prius. (a.) 1 Dall. Rep. 261. Chapman versus Steinmetz.[ McKimm v. Riddle
Footnote 2 U.S. 100 (1788) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
MCKIMM v. RIDDLE, 2 U.S. 100 (1788)
2 U.S. 100 (Dall.)
M'Kimm et al. Executors
v.
Riddle*
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
May Sessions, 1788
Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Pleas, non assumpsit, payment , &c.
The plaintiffs, having proved the contract, were called on to produce their Letters Testamentary; but the Counsel insisted, that although they had them, they were not bound to produce them on the present issue.
By the Court: It is not necessary, under the pleas in this cause, to produce the Letters Testamentary. If the defendant wished to have them produced, he should have pleaded, and put the matter in issue.
Footnotes
[Footnote *] Ruled at Carlisle Nisi Prius. (a.) 1 Dall. Rep. 261. Chapman versus Steinmetz.[ McKimm v. Riddle
Footnote 2 U.S. 100 (1788) ]
