Transcript of Proceedings, circa 20 October 1840 [Scribner v. Rigdon, Smith & Cowdery]

  • Source Note
  • Historical Introduction

Document Transcript

Pleas before the Court of Common Pleas within and for the County of in the State of at a Term of said Court begun and held at on the twentieth day of October in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty.—
Be it remembered, that heretofore to wit at the October Term of said Court in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven sued out of the office of the of said Court a writ of summons against and others in the words and figures following to wit:—
“The State of Ohio)
ss)
Seal
To the of our said — Greeting:— We command you that you summon Joseph Smith, Jr & if he be found in your to appear forthwith before our Court of Common Pleas now sitting at the Court-House in the town of , to answer in a plea of to his damage fifteen hundred dollars, as is said Herein fail not but of this writ and your service make due return.
Witness Clerk of our said Court, at the 26th day of October Anno Domini one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven.—
C[harles] H. Foot Dep Clerk”—
Upon which writ was the following endorsment to wit:—
“Suit brot to recover for goods &c sold and delivered to defts for money had & recd to the use of s And also for money lent & advanced to defts— amt claimed to be due $850.00. Oct 26. 1837—”
The foregoing writ was forthwith returned into Court by the of our said endorsed as follows to wit:—
“The State of Ohio)
ss)
I have executed the command of this writ by leaving true copies at the residence of Joseph Smith Jr and with their wives they being absent this 27 Oct 1837—
Dept Shff”—
Whereupon it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.— Afterwards to wit on the forth day of December in the year last aforesaid the said filed in the s office aforesaid his declaration in the words and figures following to wit:—
[“]The State of Ohio)
ss)
Court of Common Pleas after October Term A.D. 1837.— complains of [p. 530]
& Joseph Smith Jr (the of said having returned not found as to against whom process was also issued in this cause) for that whereas the said defendants and the said at in said on the first day of October A. D. 1837 were partners in trade under the name and firm of Rigdon Smith & Cowdery and so being partners as aforesaid on the day and year aforesaid at aforesaid were indebted to the in the sum of one thousand dollars for the labor work care diligence and attention of him the said by him the said before that time done performed and bestowed in and about the business of the said defendants and the said and at their special instance and request— and also in the further sum of one thousand dollars for divers goods wares and merchandize before that time sold and delivered to said defendants and the said and at their like special instance and request;— and also in the further sum of one thousand dollars for so much money before that time lent and advanced to and paid laid out and expended for said defendants and said and at their like special instance and request; and also in the further sum of one thousand dollars for other money by said defendants and the said before then had and received to and for the use of the said — and being so indebted they the said defendant and the said partners as aforesaid on the day and year last aforesaid at aforesaid undertook and then and there faithfully promised the to pay to him the said several sums of money in this declaration mentioned. Yet the said defendants and the said their said promises and undertakings in no wise regarding have not as yet paid the said several sums of money in this declaration mentioned or any or either of them or any part thereof to the said although often requested and demanded but the said defendant and the said to pay the same have hitherto wholly neglected and refused, to the damage of the fifteen hundred dollars and therefore he sues &c
Hitchcock & Wilder s Attys”—
Afterwards to wit at the April Term of said Court in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty eight it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
Afterwards to wit at the June Term of said Court in the year last aforesaid it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
Afterwards to wit at the November Term of said Court in the year last aforesaid it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
Afterwards to wit at the April Term of said Court in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty nine it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
Afterwards to wit at the June Term of said Court in the year last aforesaid it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
Afterwards to wit at the November Term of said Court in the year last aforesaid it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued unt[i]l the next Term of said court.—
Afterwards to wit at the April Term of said Court in the year first aforesaid it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
Afterwards to wit at the June Term of said Court in the year first aforesaid it was ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next Term of said Court.—
And now at this Term of said Court that is to say at the Term thereof first aforesaid the being three times called to come into Court and [p. 531] prosecute his suit comes not but makes default. It is therefore considered by the Court that the become and that the defendants recover against him their costs and charges by them in and about the defending of this suit in that behalf expended taxed at two dollars and twenty five cents; And it is ordered by the Court that the pay the costs and charges by him made in and about the prosecuting of this suit taxed at seven dollars and eighty five cents; and in default thereof that issue to collect the same. By mutual agreement of the parties no docket fee is taxed in this cause [p. 532]

Footnotes

  1. 1

    TEXT: “Seal” enclosed in a hand-drawn representation of a seal.