Summary

Samuel Nelson Insurance Company v. Weide (76 U.S. 677…

If there was any irregularity in not filing a new complaint or declaration, it was to late, after the defendant had taken issue upon the complaint, to take advantage of it. The question, however, whether a new complaint, or declaration, should have been filed on a removal of the cause from a State court, is one of practice, and not the subject for which error will lie.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Nelson Insurance Company v. Weide (76 U.S. 677…

The Ithaca and Owego Railroad Company, [2] it was held that when original entries are produced, and the person who made them, and knew them at the time to be true, testified that he made the entries, and that he believed them to be true, although at the time of testifying he had no recollection of the facts set forth in the entries, such evidence is admissible, as prim a facie evidence for the jury.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Nelson Insurance Company v. Weide (76 U.S. 677…

As to the second question, the admissibility of the evidence received by the court. There can be no doubt but the day-books and ledger, the entries in which were testified to be correct by the persons who made them, were properly admitted. They would not have been evidence, per se, but with the testimony accompanying them all objections were removed.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature