Sheldon v. Clark
1 Johns. 513 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1806
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.