THE LONDON PACKET. MERINO, CLAIMANT

U.S. | 1817-03-05
2 Wheat. 371 Supreme Court of the United States (1817)
Also reported at: 4 L. Ed. 264 · SCDB 1817-018 · 1817 U.S. LEXIS 413

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

In this admiralty case involving the ship London Packet, the Supreme Court established procedural rules governing the presentation of evidence in appeals from lower courts. The Court held that while affidavits previously transmitted from the circuit court could be read, new proof not previously offered below could not be introduced unless the Court first determined from the existing record that further evidence was warranted, and any such additional proof would need to be taken under a formal commission rather than through informal affidavits.


© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
[Mr. Chief Justice Marshall.

[Mr. Chief Justice Marshall.

The court is of opinion that the-affidavit transmitted from, the circuit. court may be now read. But as to the new proof now offered by the claimant, it is the practice of this court to hear the cause in the first instance, upon the evidence transmitted from the circuit court, and to decide upo,n that evidence whether it is proper to allow farther proof. The new proof cannot, therefore, be now read; but, as the opposite party wishes it, the counsel may state the nature of the proof, though not the contents, thereof in detail. If the ease shall ultimately appear entitled to farther proof, an order will be made for that purpose,}

Mr. D. B, Ogden, for the claimant,

offered to read affidavits, as farther proof, which had not been taken under a commission, But they were rejected by the court; the cause was continued to the next term;_ and the farther proof ordered to, be taken under a commission, according to the rule of court of the present term.

March 13th.

Farther proof was ordered in the cause.

Cause continued,”a a

Vide Appendix, Note I.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw