| Sup. Ct. N.C. | Sep 5, 1794
It has been usual to read depositions where it appears they have been read in the court below; though perhaps this rule might not be a proper one in case the party opposing the reading could show an irregularity to the Court here. But he does not show it in the present instance; he only alleges the deposition was not signed by the deponent. But we have already decided (Murphy v. *80 (106) Work, ante, 105) that the want of the deponent's signature is not sufficient to prevent the reading his deposition, if it be certified by the justice or commissioner to have been sworn to; for we must give credit to this certificate so far as to believe that the party was sworn. So the deposition was read.
Cited: Boggs v. Mining Co.,