This item is reproduced by permission of The Huntington Library, San Marino, California.

Docket Entry, circa 25 January 1838 [Spencer v. Cahoon et al.]

  • Source Note
Page 349
image
Wm. W. Spencer
vs.
Joseph Smith Junr. &
Debt. 56.57 56.41
Just[ice] 1.01
Cont. [Constable] Cost. .75
Plaint[iff] cost. .50
Deffend.ts. [Defendants] .25
d[itt]o—— .25
Action of debt for money had and received, of which the following is a receipt from the defendants, Received of fifty dollars for Wm. W. Spencer which is to be paid when called for. Nov. 9th 1835
Cahoon Carter & Co.
January 25th 1838 on the oath of Plaintiffs attorney issued a capias to Constable which was returned executed by bringing forward and the others not found. fees .75 Issued a subpoena for which was served by Plff. attorney
Court called parties answered, but Defendants contended that the firm of Cahoon Carter & Co consisted only of & Plaintif called on who was sworn and testified. Defendant called on Plaintiffs attorney who was sworn & testified was also sworn and testified, It was considered <by> me after hearing all the evidence and the remarks of parties it was considered that Joseph Smith Jnr & were not members of the said firm of Cahoon Carter & Co. were consequently discharged from any libility in this suit, but that judgement be rendered against said & for the sum of fifty six dollars <forty one> fifty seven and a half cents and costs taxed at two dollars and seventy six cents
J. P. [p. 349]
Wm. W. Spencer
vs.
Joseph Smith Junr. &
Debt. 56.41
Justice 1.01
Cont. [Constable] Cost. .75
Plaintiff cost. .50
Deffend.ts. [Defendants] .25
ditto—— .25
Action of debt for money had and received, of which the following is a receipt from the defendants, Received of fifty dollars for Wm. W. Spencer which is to be paid when called for. Nov. 9th 1835
Cahoon Carter & Co.
January 25th 1838 on the oath of Plaintiffs attorney issued a capias to Constable which was returned executed by bringing forward and the others not found. fees .75 Issued a subpoena for which was served by Plff. attorney
Court called parties answered, but Defendants contended that the firm of Cahoon Carter & Co consisted only of & Plaintif called on who was sworn and testified. Defendant called on Plaintiffs attorney who was sworn & testified was also sworn and testified, It was considered by me after hearing all the evidence and the remarks of parties that Joseph Smith Jnr & were not members of the said firm of Cahoon Carter & Co. were consequently discharged from any libility in this suit, but that judgement be rendered against said & for the sum of fifty six dollars forty one cents and costs taxed at two dollars and seventy six cents
J. P. [p. 349]
Page 349