Case Name: James Innerarity, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas Byrne
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1847-01
Citations: 5 How. 295
Docket Number: 
Parties: James Innerarity, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas Byrne.
Judges: 
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 46
Pages: 295–295

Head Matter:
James Innerarity, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas Byrne.
A citation is not necessarily a part of the record, and the fact of its haying been . issued and served may be proved aliunde.
Mr. Bagby
moved to dismiss the writ of error in this case for the want of a citation. None appeared in the record.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice McLEAN
delivered the opinion of the court, saying, that the citation was not necessarily a part of the record, it forming no part of the proceedings of the court below. The presumption is, that one was issued when the writ of error was allowed, and it may be proved aliimde.
Motion overruled, and case continued to next term.