General
James Innerarity, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas Byrne
46 U.S. 2955 How. 295·Supreme Court of the United States·1847
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
James Innerarity, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas Byrne.
A citation is not necessarily a part of the record, and the fact of its haying been . issued and served may be proved aliunde.
Mr. Bagby
moved to dismiss the writ of error in this case for the want of a citation. None appeared in the record.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice McLEAN]
Mr. Justice McLEAN
delivered the opinion of the court, saying, that the citation was not necessarily a part of the record, it forming no part of the proceedings of the court below. The presumption is, that one was issued when the writ of error was allowed, and it may be proved aliimde.
Motion overruled, and case continued to next term.