Skip to main content

King v. Worthington

Citations

  • 73 Ill. 161

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence—copy of instrument. A letter-press copy of a writing is not an original. It in nowise differs from any other accurate copy than in the mode in which it is made, and can be used in the place of the original in no case where a proved copy made in another manner would not he equally admissible.</p> <p>2. Same—under Burnt Record Act. A copy of an abstract is not admissible in evidence under the Burnt Record Act, although it is a letter-press or facsimile copy, and such a case is made as would make the original competent evidence, if produced.</p> <p>3. Witness—competency of interested witness against heirs. Grantors with covenants of warranty are not competent witnesses to prove their ownership and conveyance of the property described in lost deeds, under the Burnt Record Act, as against a party who defends as an heir at law of a deceased person.</p>

Judges: Scholfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.