Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rodman vs. Hoops Ex'Rs

Rodman vs Hoops Ex'Rs

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1784
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/77863

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
1 U.S. 85
Subject
Consumer

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Consumer

Key legal issue
Consumer

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rodman

Respondent

Hoops Ex'Rs

Excerpt

rodman v. hoops ex'rs - 1 u.s. 85 (1784) u.s. supreme court rodman v. hoops ex'rs, 1 u.s. 85 (1784) 1 u.s. 85 (dall.) rodman et al. ex. v. hoops's ex. supreme court of pennsylvania september term, 1784 in this cause, the defendant's offered in evidence an entry made in the books of the testator, of money paid in discharge of a promissory note. this was acknowledged to be the orignal entry; but there was no proof by whom it was made, or, whether the person who made it was dead, or alive. by the court. let it be read to the jury; not as evidence that the defendant has paid the note, but merely that such an entry was made nineteen years ago, of the payment of a note of twenty three years standing; and to support the general presumption of payment after such a length of time. nor is this to be drawn into precedent; for our allowance of the evidence is founded on the particular circumstances of this case. to prove another point in the same cause, a book was offered, in the form of a ledger, containing, in some instances, referrences to a waste- book. notwithstanding this, it was insisted, on the one hand, to be an original, and not a transcript; but denied on the other; and the person, who, it was said, could prove it, was incapable of attending on account of sickness. the court ordered the book to be read; leaving it to the jury to determine, on the face of it, whether it was an original or transcript; and directing them in the latter case, to pay no regard to it.[ rodman v. hoops ex'rs 1 u.s. 85 (1784)

Full Judgment

RODMAN v. HOOPS EX'RS - 1 U.S. 85 (1784)
U.S. Supreme Court RODMAN v. HOOPS EX'RS, 1 U.S. 85 (1784)

1 U.S. 85 (Dall.)

Rodman et al. ex.
v.
Hoops's ex.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

September Term, 1784

In this cause, the defendant's offered in evidence an entry made in the books of the testator, of money paid in discharge of a promissory note. This was acknowledged to be the orignal entry; but there was no proof by whom it was made, or, whether the person who made it was dead, or alive.

By the Court. Let it be read to the jury; not as evidence that the defendant has paid the note, but merely that such an entry was made nineteen years ago, of the payment of a note of twenty three years standing; and to support the general presumption of payment after such a length of time. Nor is this to be drawn into precedent; for our allowance of the evidence is founded on the particular circumstances of this case.

To prove another point in the same cause, a book was offered, in the form of a ledger, containing, in some instances, referrences to a waste- book. Notwithstanding this, it was insisted, on the one hand, to be an original, and not a transcript; but denied on the other; and the person, who, it was said, could prove it, was incapable of attending on account of sickness.

The Court ordered the book to be read; leaving it to the jury to determine, on the face of it, whether it was an original or transcript; and directing them in the latter case, to pay no regard to it.[ Rodman v. Hoops Ex'rs 1 U.S. 85 (1784)

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial