An Exposition of the Practice Relative to the Right to Begin and Right to Reply in Trials by Jury, and in Appeals at Quarter Sessions

Sprednja platnica
Richards, 1837 - 104 strani

Mnenja - Napišite recenzijo

Na običajnih mestih nismo našli nobenih recenzij.

Druge izdaje - Prikaži vse

Pogosti izrazi in povedi

Priljubljeni odlomki

Stran 16 - Ellenborough) said, at p. 199, the " rule of law is, that where any act is required to be done on the one part, so that the party neglecting it would be guilty of a criminal neglect of duty in not having done it, the law presumes the affirmative, and throws the burden of proving the contrary, that is, in such case of proving a negative, on the other side...
Stran 80 - ... before the first day of the sessions at which such appeal is intended to be tried...
Stran 10 - Looking at these things according to common sense, we should consider what is the substantive fact to be made out, and on whom it lies to make it out. It is not so much the form of the issue which ought to be considered, as the substance and effect of it. In many cases, a party, by a little difference in the drawing of his pleadings, might make it either affirmative or negative, as he pleased. The plaintiff here says, 'You did not repair'; he might have said, 'You let the house become dilapidated'.
Stran 44 - And the judges have resolved, " that in cases of slander, libel, and other actions for personal injuries, where the plaintiff seeks to recover actual damages of an unascertained amount, he is entitled to begin, although the affirmative of the issue may in point of form be with the defendant.
Stran 28 - P. 633. Jan. 17, 1837. — This was an action of assumpsit by the indorsee of a promissory note against the maker, to which the Defendant pleaded a long plea, amounting in substance to want of consideration for the note ; to a portion of which the Plaintiff replied, that there had been a good consideration given, and to the rest entered a nolle prosequi. Counsel for the Plaintiff said, he believed Defendant should begin, which was ruled accordingly by Alderson B..
Stran 79 - ... the extent to which each person omitted ought to be rated, and where the investigation before the sessions would be likely to exhaust more time than they could reasonably be required to give up, we think it would not be an improper exercise of their discretion to quash the rate, and make the officers do in the end what they ought to have done at the beginning.
Stran 64 - In an action in ejectment, plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of his adversary's...
Stran 103 - That the witness cannot in cross-examination be compelled to answer whether he did or did not make such a statement before the magistrate until after his deposition has been read, and it appears that it contains no mention of such statement. In that event the counsel for the prisoner may proceed with his cross-examination, and if the witness admits such...

Bibliografski podatki