History
  • No items yet
midpage
Bassett v. Marshall
9 Mass. 312
Mass.
1812
Check Treatment
But the Court

were of opinion that, since it was proved that the magistrate made no record of his administering the oath, the evidence admitted was the 1 ¿st that could be required. The testimony *282of the witnesses was therefore legally admitted, and was competent to prove the fact.

Sproat and Holmes for the defendant in error.

The judgment was affirmed, with costs for the defendant in error. (1)

Vide Sherman vs. Needham, 4 Pick. 67. — Commonwealth vs. Hall, 3 Pick. 262. — Commonwealth vs. Dedham, 16 Mass. 141.

Case Details

Case Name: Bassett v. Marshall
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Sep 15, 1812
Citation: 9 Mass. 312
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.