GUPPE v. BROWN, 4 U.S. 410 (1805)

U.S. Supreme Court

GUPPE v. BROWN, 4 U.S. 410 (1805)

4 U.S. 410 (Dall.)

Guppy et al.
v.
Brown.

Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District.

October Term, 1805

ACOMMISSION had issued to four commissioners, jointly, to take the depositions of witnesses in England. It was executed and returned by three of the commissioners only, two of whom, however, were of the defendant's nomination.

At the trial of the cause, the defendant's counsel objected to the reading of the depositions; and cited 1 Bac. Abr. 202. 2 Inst.

The plaintiffs' counsel observed, that the commission had not issued in the usual form; but insisted that as the defendant's

Page 4 U.S. 410, 411

commissioners had attended, the objection could not be maintained on his part.

By the COURT:

The objection is fatal. The commissioners do not derive their authority from the parties, but from the Court; and as it is a special authority, it must be strictly pursued. The power given to four, cannot be well executed by three, commissioners.

The evidence over-ruled.

Ingersoll, and Tod, for the plaintiffs.

Franklin, and Dallas, for the defendant.


U.S. Supreme Court

GUPPE v. BROWN, 4 U.S. 410 (1805)

 4 U.S. 410 (Dall.)

Guppy et al.
v.
Brown.

Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District.

October Term, 1805

ACOMMISSION had issued to four commissioners, jointly, to take the depositions of witnesses in England. It was executed and returned by three of the commissioners only, two of whom, however, were of the defendant's nomination.

At the trial of the cause, the defendant's counsel objected to the reading of the depositions; and cited 1 Bac. Abr. 202. 2 Inst.

The plaintiffs' counsel observed, that the commission had not issued in the usual form; but insisted that as the defendant's

Page 4 U.S. 410, 411

commissioners had attended, the objection could not be maintained on his part.

By the COURT:

The objection is fatal. The commissioners do not derive their authority from the parties, but from the Court; and as it is a special authority, it must be strictly pursued. The power given to four, cannot be well executed by three, commissioners.

The evidence over-ruled.

Ingersoll, and Tod, for the plaintiffs.

Franklin, and Dallas, for the defendant.

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.