History
  • No items yet
midpage
Sheldon v. Clark
1 Johns. 513
N.Y. Sup. Ct.
1806
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

The averment, that the defendant practised physic contrary to the statute, was sufficient; and it was incumbent on the defendant, by his plea, to have brought himself within some of the provisos of the act. As he has not done so, either by pleading or evidence, we are of opinion that the judgment ought to be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Sheldon v. Clark
Court Name: New York Supreme Court
Date Published: Aug 15, 1806
Citation: 1 Johns. 513
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. Sup. Ct.
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.