Summary

Portrait of John Marshall John Marshall Lessee of Scott v. Ratliffe — Opinion of the Court

Their counsel admits the constitutionality of the act of limitations referred to in the opinion of the court; and that it is a bar to the action as to those defendants, who show title under John Grayham; but insists that only two of the defendants show such title, and that the plaintiffs are entitled to judgment against the others.
There is no question respecting the law as applicable to the fact; but some doubt exists respecting the fact.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Marshall John Marshall Lessee of Scott v. Ratliffe — Opinion of the Court

That rule is, 'that hearsay evidence is incompetent to establish any specific fact, which fact is in its nature susceptible of being proved by witnesses who speak from their own knowledge.' Others think that the fact of the marriage being established by other testimony, the circumstance that this fact was communicated to the witness before another event took place, becomes itself a fact, and is evidence that the marriage was anterior to that other event.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Marshall John Marshall Lessee of Scott v. Ratliffe — Opinion of the Court

It becomes unnecessary to decide on this principle, because we are all of opinion that so much of the testimony of Mrs Eppes as goes to prove the death of Mr Madison was admissible, and ought not to have been excluded.
On the motion of the defendants, the court also instructed the jury 'that if the plaintiffs did not show to their satisfaction, that the defendants resided within the plaintiff's grant, and outside of the land claimed of Preston and Garrard, they ought to find for the defendants. An exception was taken to this opinion
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature