Printz v. People
William H. Printz v. The People
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Graves, J.
The witness, Mary McKenzie, was competent to give the, value of her seal-skin cloak. It was part of her personal apparel, which she had worn one winter. She testified that she had priced such articles, and that this one was certainly worth one hundred and twenty-five dollars. The evidence was regular and within previous decisions. It was not necessary to call dealers in second-hand furs.
The remaining objection is covered by Cummins v. The People, just decided, ante, p. 142.
There is no error and the judgment is affirmed.
The other Justices concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 13 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.