Dunlap v. Clay
Mississippi Supreme Court
Dunlap v. Clay, 65 Miss. 454 (Miss. 1888)
Cooper
Dunlap v. Clay
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court. .
It was not necessary that the agent of plaintiff should “ hold up his hand and swear,” to make his act an oath to the truth of the matters set out for grounds of attachment.
The affiant and the officer both understood that what was done was all that was necessary to complete the oath, and what was done was sufficiently formal.
Wharton on Criminal Law, Sec. 2205.
The judgment is reversed, the motion to quash overruled and cause remanded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Virginia V. Dunlap v. A. Q. Clay
- Cited By
- 10 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Attachment. Affidavit. /Sufficiency of oath. Case in judgment. K., agent of D., appeared before a justice of the peace, and, in the presence of the latter, an affidavit for attachment, in due form, was read to him; and he was asked by the justice if he swore to the same, and he replied that he did, “ but did not hold up his hand and swearand the affidavit was not subscribed by K., nor the jurat thereto signed by the justice of the peace, though both thought everything had been done which was necessary to perfect the affidavit. Held, that the oath was sufficiently formal and the affidavit valid.