Book Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1896 edition. Excerpt: ...was shown by the certificate of the clerk, this was held sufficient compliance with a statute in Georgia (September 16, 1883) which required the postmaster to indorse upon the package its reception by due course of mail, and to at once deliver the package to the clerk of the court. Killian v. Augusta, etc., R. Co., 78 Ga. 749. Name of Clerk Misspelled.--Where a statute does not require the name of the clerk to be contained in the address on the return, the mere fact of addressing the commission and deposition to "L. Enos Greene," instead of to " Zenos Greene," is immaterial. Rust v. Eckler, 41 N. Y. 488. 1. Morgan v. Jones, 44 Conn. 225; Van Sickle v. Gibson, 40 Mich. 170; Ward v. Ely, 1 Dev. (N. Car.) 372; Nussear v. Arnold, 13 S. & R. (Pa.) 323 Deposition Delivered In Person.--Where depositions were taken by a justice of the peace, and his certificate showed that they had never been out of his possession or altered until he delivered them to the clerk of the court, they were held not to be inadmissible because the justice failed to comply with a statutory requirement relating to commissions, and directing that they be placed in an envelope and sealed, and the seal indorsed with the name of the commissioner and the style of the cause. Hutson v. Hutson, 9 Lea (Tenn.) 354. Evidence of Sealing.--The certificate of the clerk that a deposition was opened and filed by him is prima facie evidence that it was duly sealed up in conformity with the requirements of the statute. Rodn v. Hapgood, 8 Gray (Mass.) 394. Hutilatedor Unsealed Return.--Where it appeared that the envelope in which a deposition was contained was badlymutilated, being open half its length, on each side and at each of the four corners, and not having the...