General

Travers v. Hight

2 D.C. 412 Cranch 41·United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia·1812

(Fitzhugh, J., absent,)

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Travers v. Hight. Affidavit to hold to hail. The account was headed “ George W. Hight to Esias Tra-vers, Dr., for articles furnished by his direction, and he to be answerable for the payment thereof.” Among other items was a charge for rations for the officers, &e., (George W. Hight being a recruiting officer.) An affidavit of the plaintiff was indorsed on the paper, “ that the within account is just and true as stated.” Mr. Jones for the plaintiff. Mr. Caldwell for the defendant. [MAJORITY — The Court] The Court (Fitzhugh, J., absent,) said it was not sufficient. It was neither a positive affidavit that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in a certain sum ; nor was it such an affidavit as made the account evidence per se, under the Act of Assembly of Maryland, 1729, c. 20, ■§> 9, according to the rule in the case of Smith et al. v. Watson, at June term, 1806, in Washington, [1 Crunch, C. C. 311.]